id
stringlengths 33
45
| content
stringlengths 95
98.7k
| url
stringlengths 18
263
|
|---|---|---|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_850602837#5_1323867454
|
Title: Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns?
Trivially true
Gun Control helps reduce crime
Yes, because with less weapons, you get less crime.
Guns were made to Harm and Kill
No one needs an assault rifle
Wake up you Americans!
Stricter gun laws CAN decrease rates of crime. What is the alternative? Close our eyes to the problem and do nothing?
Guns in the hands of non-criminals also get misused.
Drunk driving, for example
States with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of death by gun shot
People In The Community
I Believe Everyone Saying Yes On Otherside Are Mentally Challenged!!!
No matter what, If someoe wants a gun; they will get a gun
The determined person doesn't need a gun to hurt you...
Taking guns will only stop novice criminals.
No, by definition criminals do not abide by laws.
Do me a favor...
I'm Canadian
Banning and Regulation Have Never Worked.
Just look at Chicago
Content: I think Assault rifle, Rocket launchers, Explosives, and machine guns should be banned. I only support Shot guns and normal guns like the Beretta Laramie. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
8
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes, because with less weapons, you get less crime. Take a look at the crime rates of countries like the United Kingdom. Their crime rate is ridiculously low, compared to ours here in the United States. I am all for our freedom to bear arms, however, this is not about taking all privileges away. Just by simply putting stricter laws in place on who can own them, it will greatly reduce the crimes involving guns. Posted by: 5h4yGlory
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
6
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Guns were made to Harm and Kill
Some people like to say that "guns don't kill people, people kill people" and then compare death rates from guns to those of cars. There is an inherent difference between the two things, however.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-stricter-gun-control-laws-decrease-the-rate-of-crimes-involving-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_850602837#6_1323869682
|
Title: Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns?
Trivially true
Gun Control helps reduce crime
Yes, because with less weapons, you get less crime.
Guns were made to Harm and Kill
No one needs an assault rifle
Wake up you Americans!
Stricter gun laws CAN decrease rates of crime. What is the alternative? Close our eyes to the problem and do nothing?
Guns in the hands of non-criminals also get misused.
Drunk driving, for example
States with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of death by gun shot
People In The Community
I Believe Everyone Saying Yes On Otherside Are Mentally Challenged!!!
No matter what, If someoe wants a gun; they will get a gun
The determined person doesn't need a gun to hurt you...
Taking guns will only stop novice criminals.
No, by definition criminals do not abide by laws.
Do me a favor...
I'm Canadian
Banning and Regulation Have Never Worked.
Just look at Chicago
Content: I am all for our freedom to bear arms, however, this is not about taking all privileges away. Just by simply putting stricter laws in place on who can own them, it will greatly reduce the crimes involving guns. Posted by: 5h4yGlory
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
6
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Guns were made to Harm and Kill
Some people like to say that "guns don't kill people, people kill people" and then compare death rates from guns to those of cars. There is an inherent difference between the two things, however. It doesn't make sense to say that a device which can bring fatal harm should not be regulated. Even cars are regulated, as are switchblades, swords, and other weapons. The Gun is one of the most dangerous weapons out there - of COURSE it should be difficult to get one! I'm not against having a gun for protection, but do you need a semi-automatic? Of course not!
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-stricter-gun-control-laws-decrease-the-rate-of-crimes-involving-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_850602837#11_1323880802
|
Title: Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns?
Trivially true
Gun Control helps reduce crime
Yes, because with less weapons, you get less crime.
Guns were made to Harm and Kill
No one needs an assault rifle
Wake up you Americans!
Stricter gun laws CAN decrease rates of crime. What is the alternative? Close our eyes to the problem and do nothing?
Guns in the hands of non-criminals also get misused.
Drunk driving, for example
States with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of death by gun shot
People In The Community
I Believe Everyone Saying Yes On Otherside Are Mentally Challenged!!!
No matter what, If someoe wants a gun; they will get a gun
The determined person doesn't need a gun to hurt you...
Taking guns will only stop novice criminals.
No, by definition criminals do not abide by laws.
Do me a favor...
I'm Canadian
Banning and Regulation Have Never Worked.
Just look at Chicago
Content: Guns are made for one reason only, and that is to kill. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Stricter gun laws CAN decrease rates of crime. What is the alternative? Close our eyes to the problem and do nothing? I am disheartened that there is even much of a debate on this topic. Stricter gun laws would almost certainly reduce the number of gun related deaths in this country. We MUST learn something from this tragic, senseless act at Shady Hook and do something. The guns used in this heinous act were all legally purchased/registered. The primary weapon used to kill these innocent children and brave educators was a Bushmaster .223 assault rifle. If that gun could not have been legally purchased, one would reasonably believe it would not have been in the house.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-stricter-gun-control-laws-decrease-the-rate-of-crimes-involving-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_850602837#12_1323882880
|
Title: Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns?
Trivially true
Gun Control helps reduce crime
Yes, because with less weapons, you get less crime.
Guns were made to Harm and Kill
No one needs an assault rifle
Wake up you Americans!
Stricter gun laws CAN decrease rates of crime. What is the alternative? Close our eyes to the problem and do nothing?
Guns in the hands of non-criminals also get misused.
Drunk driving, for example
States with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of death by gun shot
People In The Community
I Believe Everyone Saying Yes On Otherside Are Mentally Challenged!!!
No matter what, If someoe wants a gun; they will get a gun
The determined person doesn't need a gun to hurt you...
Taking guns will only stop novice criminals.
No, by definition criminals do not abide by laws.
Do me a favor...
I'm Canadian
Banning and Regulation Have Never Worked.
Just look at Chicago
Content: Stricter gun laws would almost certainly reduce the number of gun related deaths in this country. We MUST learn something from this tragic, senseless act at Shady Hook and do something. The guns used in this heinous act were all legally purchased/registered. The primary weapon used to kill these innocent children and brave educators was a Bushmaster .223 assault rifle. If that gun could not have been legally purchased, one would reasonably believe it would not have been in the house. If we ask ourselves this question - If that weapon wasn't in the house, do you think at the very least it is possible (if not very likely) that there would have been fewer people killed? Then doesn't that tell us something? If it is at least possible that there would have been fewer victims, shouldn't we do something so that these weapons aren't available? I for one believe that there would have been less carnage. I understand that motivated bad people will do bad things, but shouldn't we at least try to make it harder for them to get their hands on these kinds of weapons and hopefully as a result reduce the number of victims?
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-stricter-gun-control-laws-decrease-the-rate-of-crimes-involving-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_850602837#15_1323889894
|
Title: Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns?
Trivially true
Gun Control helps reduce crime
Yes, because with less weapons, you get less crime.
Guns were made to Harm and Kill
No one needs an assault rifle
Wake up you Americans!
Stricter gun laws CAN decrease rates of crime. What is the alternative? Close our eyes to the problem and do nothing?
Guns in the hands of non-criminals also get misused.
Drunk driving, for example
States with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of death by gun shot
People In The Community
I Believe Everyone Saying Yes On Otherside Are Mentally Challenged!!!
No matter what, If someoe wants a gun; they will get a gun
The determined person doesn't need a gun to hurt you...
Taking guns will only stop novice criminals.
No, by definition criminals do not abide by laws.
Do me a favor...
I'm Canadian
Banning and Regulation Have Never Worked.
Just look at Chicago
Content: These things should not be legally allowed in the hands of regular citizens. Their is no practical purpose for it. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Guns in the hands of non-criminals also get misused. Many arguments for no gun control purport that criminals will get guns anyways. Well, what about all the guns in regular folks homes that get used improperly, by a rebellious or disturbed teenager, angry lover,etc. Better gun control means it is harder to get guns. Let's impact gun crime wherever we can. Posted by: rsnow
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
angierae
1
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Drunk driving, for example
I've heard some arguments from people claiming that cars aren't banned because of drunk drivers, so why would tightening the rules on gun control do anything to stop gun related violence? To those who can actually justify this argument, take a look how drunk driving rates have dropped over the past decade due to stricter requirements, more policing, and other regulations that have been put into action.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-stricter-gun-control-laws-decrease-the-rate-of-crimes-involving-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_850602837#16_1323892247
|
Title: Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns?
Trivially true
Gun Control helps reduce crime
Yes, because with less weapons, you get less crime.
Guns were made to Harm and Kill
No one needs an assault rifle
Wake up you Americans!
Stricter gun laws CAN decrease rates of crime. What is the alternative? Close our eyes to the problem and do nothing?
Guns in the hands of non-criminals also get misused.
Drunk driving, for example
States with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of death by gun shot
People In The Community
I Believe Everyone Saying Yes On Otherside Are Mentally Challenged!!!
No matter what, If someoe wants a gun; they will get a gun
The determined person doesn't need a gun to hurt you...
Taking guns will only stop novice criminals.
No, by definition criminals do not abide by laws.
Do me a favor...
I'm Canadian
Banning and Regulation Have Never Worked.
Just look at Chicago
Content: Better gun control means it is harder to get guns. Let's impact gun crime wherever we can. Posted by: rsnow
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
angierae
1
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Drunk driving, for example
I've heard some arguments from people claiming that cars aren't banned because of drunk drivers, so why would tightening the rules on gun control do anything to stop gun related violence? To those who can actually justify this argument, take a look how drunk driving rates have dropped over the past decade due to stricter requirements, more policing, and other regulations that have been put into action. I'm completely against taking guns away and agree that gun violence cannot be stopped, no matter what, but who can sit there and actually say that we should do absolutely NOTHING to try and curb these horrible events from happening? It just doesn't make sense. The second amendment was written when bayonets were available, not the abundance of options available in today's world. I have a hard time thinking that the great founding leaders of our nation, if they saw what is available today, would all agree that zero additional gun control is necessary. If we can do even one thing to reduce these events, why is that a bad thing?
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-stricter-gun-control-laws-decrease-the-rate-of-crimes-involving-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_850602837#17_1323894789
|
Title: Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns?
Trivially true
Gun Control helps reduce crime
Yes, because with less weapons, you get less crime.
Guns were made to Harm and Kill
No one needs an assault rifle
Wake up you Americans!
Stricter gun laws CAN decrease rates of crime. What is the alternative? Close our eyes to the problem and do nothing?
Guns in the hands of non-criminals also get misused.
Drunk driving, for example
States with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of death by gun shot
People In The Community
I Believe Everyone Saying Yes On Otherside Are Mentally Challenged!!!
No matter what, If someoe wants a gun; they will get a gun
The determined person doesn't need a gun to hurt you...
Taking guns will only stop novice criminals.
No, by definition criminals do not abide by laws.
Do me a favor...
I'm Canadian
Banning and Regulation Have Never Worked.
Just look at Chicago
Content: I'm completely against taking guns away and agree that gun violence cannot be stopped, no matter what, but who can sit there and actually say that we should do absolutely NOTHING to try and curb these horrible events from happening? It just doesn't make sense. The second amendment was written when bayonets were available, not the abundance of options available in today's world. I have a hard time thinking that the great founding leaders of our nation, if they saw what is available today, would all agree that zero additional gun control is necessary. If we can do even one thing to reduce these events, why is that a bad thing? Common sense...
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
States with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of death by gun shot
Studies by the AMA and the Center for American Progress show states with stricter or more gun laws have a lower rate of violence from guns. There's no escaping the fact also that countries with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of gun violence as well. Constitutional arguments against stricter gun laws are nonsense since even Justice Scalia agrees that more restrictive gun can be written in such a way as to comply with the 2nd Amendment. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
People In The Community
Our problem is not about guns and weaponry its about our citizens. It is the person that causes the crime and commits the murders around the world.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-stricter-gun-control-laws-decrease-the-rate-of-crimes-involving-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_850602837#18_1323897539
|
Title: Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns?
Trivially true
Gun Control helps reduce crime
Yes, because with less weapons, you get less crime.
Guns were made to Harm and Kill
No one needs an assault rifle
Wake up you Americans!
Stricter gun laws CAN decrease rates of crime. What is the alternative? Close our eyes to the problem and do nothing?
Guns in the hands of non-criminals also get misused.
Drunk driving, for example
States with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of death by gun shot
People In The Community
I Believe Everyone Saying Yes On Otherside Are Mentally Challenged!!!
No matter what, If someoe wants a gun; they will get a gun
The determined person doesn't need a gun to hurt you...
Taking guns will only stop novice criminals.
No, by definition criminals do not abide by laws.
Do me a favor...
I'm Canadian
Banning and Regulation Have Never Worked.
Just look at Chicago
Content: Common sense...
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
States with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of death by gun shot
Studies by the AMA and the Center for American Progress show states with stricter or more gun laws have a lower rate of violence from guns. There's no escaping the fact also that countries with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of gun violence as well. Constitutional arguments against stricter gun laws are nonsense since even Justice Scalia agrees that more restrictive gun can be written in such a way as to comply with the 2nd Amendment. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
People In The Community
Our problem is not about guns and weaponry its about our citizens. It is the person that causes the crime and commits the murders around the world. We need to figure out a way of decreasing the ill mentalities in our country. People in the community are unsafe and scared of what might be coming in their directions. Citizens we call friends and family are the ones we trust and also the ones that cause crimes. It is the individuals mindset that we must protect ourselves from. Report Post
Like
Reply
JonSeeley
NarekMavis
2
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
I Believe Everyone Saying Yes On Otherside Are Mentally Challenged!!!
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-stricter-gun-control-laws-decrease-the-rate-of-crimes-involving-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_850602837#19_1323900141
|
Title: Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Can stricter gun control laws decrease the rate of crimes involving guns?
Trivially true
Gun Control helps reduce crime
Yes, because with less weapons, you get less crime.
Guns were made to Harm and Kill
No one needs an assault rifle
Wake up you Americans!
Stricter gun laws CAN decrease rates of crime. What is the alternative? Close our eyes to the problem and do nothing?
Guns in the hands of non-criminals also get misused.
Drunk driving, for example
States with stricter gun laws have lower incidence of death by gun shot
People In The Community
I Believe Everyone Saying Yes On Otherside Are Mentally Challenged!!!
No matter what, If someoe wants a gun; they will get a gun
The determined person doesn't need a gun to hurt you...
Taking guns will only stop novice criminals.
No, by definition criminals do not abide by laws.
Do me a favor...
I'm Canadian
Banning and Regulation Have Never Worked.
Just look at Chicago
Content: We need to figure out a way of decreasing the ill mentalities in our country. People in the community are unsafe and scared of what might be coming in their directions. Citizens we call friends and family are the ones we trust and also the ones that cause crimes. It is the individuals mindset that we must protect ourselves from. Report Post
Like
Reply
JonSeeley
NarekMavis
2
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
I Believe Everyone Saying Yes On Otherside Are Mentally Challenged!!! Read above statement. Criminals will always get weapons, even if they have to smuggle them in. They will never care about the law or you. By taking away our abilities to carry and defend ourselves, you are allowing criminals to not only hurt or possibly kill you, but you are allowing them also to commit more crimes ad they will not be scared of anyone, except the police on which they know will not be out to help within a certain timeframe. By then its to late.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/can-stricter-gun-control-laws-decrease-the-rate-of-crimes-involving-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_850902411#9_1324745707
|
Title: Do you think life exists outside of the Earth? | Debate.org
Headings:
Do you think life exists outside of the Earth?
How could it not ?
Life always finds a way
I agree there is life outside of the Earth, because the universe is far too vast.
I believe some kind of life exists outside of the Earth because of the sheer size of the Universe.
Yes, I feel that life outside earth exists. The volume of planets mean that the chances of life being elsewhere are very high.
If there is life here, then there is life on other planets
There are already species that has been discovered living outside earth.
I support this on the sheer vastness of the universe.
There is life which exist outside of the earth because of the various evidence which have been found from the life outside the earth.
Yes, the universe is infinite. There must be other life forms of some kind out there.
The Holy Bible says that God created the Heavens and the Earth.
Most likely not, because there is no evidence for it.
I have doubts
Complex life exists only on earth and not for long.
No Life in our universe
The vastness of space is no assurance of life beyond Earth.
Life elsewhere in the universe.
There is no evidence YET, so I am going to say NO at the moment.
Life is unique.
Life is only on Earth because GOD created Earth for us
Content: Report Post
Like
Reply
Anukta
1
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
There are already species that has been discovered living outside earth. Some bacterias and virus came from space. Like the ebola virus and other viruses. Life doesn't pertain to human-like beings alone. But it also pertains to every other species living outside out planet. I also support that there are extraterrestrials living in other galaxies, perhaps not in our solar system but there's millions of galaxies beside ours. So there's a large possibility of life existing in other planets. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
I support this on the sheer vastness of the universe. Life as we know it survives heavily on water and oxygen, and the search for life outside of earth has primarily been focused on finding these substances. However, our understanding of life is based on one example, earth.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/do-you-think-life-exists-outside-of-the-earth
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_850902411#10_1324748151
|
Title: Do you think life exists outside of the Earth? | Debate.org
Headings:
Do you think life exists outside of the Earth?
How could it not ?
Life always finds a way
I agree there is life outside of the Earth, because the universe is far too vast.
I believe some kind of life exists outside of the Earth because of the sheer size of the Universe.
Yes, I feel that life outside earth exists. The volume of planets mean that the chances of life being elsewhere are very high.
If there is life here, then there is life on other planets
There are already species that has been discovered living outside earth.
I support this on the sheer vastness of the universe.
There is life which exist outside of the earth because of the various evidence which have been found from the life outside the earth.
Yes, the universe is infinite. There must be other life forms of some kind out there.
The Holy Bible says that God created the Heavens and the Earth.
Most likely not, because there is no evidence for it.
I have doubts
Complex life exists only on earth and not for long.
No Life in our universe
The vastness of space is no assurance of life beyond Earth.
Life elsewhere in the universe.
There is no evidence YET, so I am going to say NO at the moment.
Life is unique.
Life is only on Earth because GOD created Earth for us
Content: I also support that there are extraterrestrials living in other galaxies, perhaps not in our solar system but there's millions of galaxies beside ours. So there's a large possibility of life existing in other planets. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
I support this on the sheer vastness of the universe. Life as we know it survives heavily on water and oxygen, and the search for life outside of earth has primarily been focused on finding these substances. However, our understanding of life is based on one example, earth. Therefore I think that life outside earth may well not need water or oxygen. They may have alternative substance for survival. Given the huge amount of chemicals that may be formed from the elements, it could well be the life outside earth survives on these other chemicals as opposed to the chemicals we see as vital to life, on earth. Report Post
Like
Reply
mattcrow
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
There is life which exist outside of the earth because of the various evidence which have been found from the life outside the earth. Yes, I totally agree that the life do exists outside of the earth.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/do-you-think-life-exists-outside-of-the-earth
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851207116#6_1325639373
|
Title: Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control? | Debate.org
Headings:
Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control?
What emergency is there really?
Look at the statistics
Why would we need guns?
They are NEEDED
GUNS KILL PEOPLE
We absolutely need strict gun control!
I am against gun violence.
The Constitution of the United States Really Needs to be Edited.
How any more have to die?
School shootings are deadly
NO ! !
Actually learn some history.
More guns equals less crime
I could kill you with a pencil, ooh crap ban WRITING IMPLIMENTS!
Should we ban everything that poses a potential threat?
Gun laws will not make you safer.
I am Pro Gun.
Gun bans already exist and don't work
No, I disagree! NO gun control!!
Guns don't kill people; people kill people.
Load More Arguments
Content: Just think about it. Why would we need guns? Report Post
Like
Reply
tommy111
G_O_D
abuenrostro
The_Dude1026
awesome_one
5
20
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
They are NEEDED
Does their 'NEED', not 'want' stricter laws, and yes, I think it is a necessity that there are stricter laws. After all these recent shootings, it seems needed. Any mentally handicapped person can just go and buy a gun, any violent criminal (gun or no gun crime.. Still violent) can go and buy a gun. If you are a responsible adult, then you should have no worries about stricter gun laws, because they shouldn't effect you. Posted by: MoonGazer
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
G_O_D
zhaod1
DemiCross
3
18
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
GUNS KILL PEOPLE
I think there should more gun laws in place because we have the police to protect us. I don't think they should be completely banned but no military grade or fully automatic weapons, just a hunting rifle or a 9mm pistol. There have been to many mass shootings and crazy people with guns we just can't keep taking chances.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/does-there-need-to-be-stricter-laws-for-gun-control
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851207116#10_1325647380
|
Title: Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control? | Debate.org
Headings:
Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control?
What emergency is there really?
Look at the statistics
Why would we need guns?
They are NEEDED
GUNS KILL PEOPLE
We absolutely need strict gun control!
I am against gun violence.
The Constitution of the United States Really Needs to be Edited.
How any more have to die?
School shootings are deadly
NO ! !
Actually learn some history.
More guns equals less crime
I could kill you with a pencil, ooh crap ban WRITING IMPLIMENTS!
Should we ban everything that poses a potential threat?
Gun laws will not make you safer.
I am Pro Gun.
Gun bans already exist and don't work
No, I disagree! NO gun control!!
Guns don't kill people; people kill people.
Load More Arguments
Content: You’re more likely to have a gun used against you or a loved one than to actually have it protect you from an intruder. Gun nuts don’t care about anyone but themselves and their rights. Your right to own a gun ends when it means another American will have to give up their right to life. The only purpose guns serve is to kill. If guns are not a problem then why is the United States the most violent nation in the industrialized world and we also have the most firearm proliferation and guns per capita? Enough is enough! Report Post
Like
Reply
DemiCross
Dutchman52
naaaaaat
Liberalmoderate14
4
16
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
I am against gun violence. Guns are the reason why people are at war. They are the reason that people in gangs shoot each other. They should be outlawed so there will be less violence and fewer deaths.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/does-there-need-to-be-stricter-laws-for-gun-control
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851207116#11_1325649267
|
Title: Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control? | Debate.org
Headings:
Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control?
What emergency is there really?
Look at the statistics
Why would we need guns?
They are NEEDED
GUNS KILL PEOPLE
We absolutely need strict gun control!
I am against gun violence.
The Constitution of the United States Really Needs to be Edited.
How any more have to die?
School shootings are deadly
NO ! !
Actually learn some history.
More guns equals less crime
I could kill you with a pencil, ooh crap ban WRITING IMPLIMENTS!
Should we ban everything that poses a potential threat?
Gun laws will not make you safer.
I am Pro Gun.
Gun bans already exist and don't work
No, I disagree! NO gun control!!
Guns don't kill people; people kill people.
Load More Arguments
Content: Enough is enough! Report Post
Like
Reply
DemiCross
Dutchman52
naaaaaat
Liberalmoderate14
4
16
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
I am against gun violence. Guns are the reason why people are at war. They are the reason that people in gangs shoot each other. They should be outlawed so there will be less violence and fewer deaths. Yes, I understand that the police have to have them, but if guns were outlawed, they would have no reason to have them. Report Post
Like
Reply
JemLG
GunNutsNovel
2
15
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
The Constitution of the United States Really Needs to be Edited. Okay, this is stupid how people just allow the gun law to slide by just because the constitution gives us the right to bear arms. Has anyone ever considered revising this outdated list of rights given to the citizens of the United States? Guns were originally given to us for protection, not for killing other people, which is really beginning to seem like what we are trying to protect ourselves from.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/does-there-need-to-be-stricter-laws-for-gun-control
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851207116#12_1325651310
|
Title: Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control? | Debate.org
Headings:
Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control?
What emergency is there really?
Look at the statistics
Why would we need guns?
They are NEEDED
GUNS KILL PEOPLE
We absolutely need strict gun control!
I am against gun violence.
The Constitution of the United States Really Needs to be Edited.
How any more have to die?
School shootings are deadly
NO ! !
Actually learn some history.
More guns equals less crime
I could kill you with a pencil, ooh crap ban WRITING IMPLIMENTS!
Should we ban everything that poses a potential threat?
Gun laws will not make you safer.
I am Pro Gun.
Gun bans already exist and don't work
No, I disagree! NO gun control!!
Guns don't kill people; people kill people.
Load More Arguments
Content: Yes, I understand that the police have to have them, but if guns were outlawed, they would have no reason to have them. Report Post
Like
Reply
JemLG
GunNutsNovel
2
15
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
The Constitution of the United States Really Needs to be Edited. Okay, this is stupid how people just allow the gun law to slide by just because the constitution gives us the right to bear arms. Has anyone ever considered revising this outdated list of rights given to the citizens of the United States? Guns were originally given to us for protection, not for killing other people, which is really beginning to seem like what we are trying to protect ourselves from. Seriously, there will eventually be massacres happening all over the streets if we don't restrain those who will abuse the right from getting them. Report Post
Like
Reply
Dutchman52
Jack_D
nebula7693
wzardmichael
redroxy12345
5
15
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
How any more have to die? If we could save just one person by having stricter gun laws wouldn't it be worth it? If there is one thing we could do to save a life do we not have a responsibility to do so? Something that people don't seem to understand is that stricter gun laws don't take away guns you already have;
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/does-there-need-to-be-stricter-laws-for-gun-control
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851207116#13_1325653604
|
Title: Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control? | Debate.org
Headings:
Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control?
What emergency is there really?
Look at the statistics
Why would we need guns?
They are NEEDED
GUNS KILL PEOPLE
We absolutely need strict gun control!
I am against gun violence.
The Constitution of the United States Really Needs to be Edited.
How any more have to die?
School shootings are deadly
NO ! !
Actually learn some history.
More guns equals less crime
I could kill you with a pencil, ooh crap ban WRITING IMPLIMENTS!
Should we ban everything that poses a potential threat?
Gun laws will not make you safer.
I am Pro Gun.
Gun bans already exist and don't work
No, I disagree! NO gun control!!
Guns don't kill people; people kill people.
Load More Arguments
Content: Seriously, there will eventually be massacres happening all over the streets if we don't restrain those who will abuse the right from getting them. Report Post
Like
Reply
Dutchman52
Jack_D
nebula7693
wzardmichael
redroxy12345
5
15
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
How any more have to die? If we could save just one person by having stricter gun laws wouldn't it be worth it? If there is one thing we could do to save a life do we not have a responsibility to do so? Something that people don't seem to understand is that stricter gun laws don't take away guns you already have; it takes away assault rifles from stores and also makes the process purchase a gun a little harder. Report Post
Like
Reply
JemLG
betterjubby
mcalvert
3
12
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
School shootings are deadly
There should be stricter laws, because look at Columbine years back. There was nothing exactly wrong except he was being bullied, which you should tell an adult about, and it was a gun that was used. In Newtown, 20 children were killed because of guns and the user not getting a good background check. Finally, look at Aurora, I believe 29 people died because of a guy with a gun in a movie theater and it was semi-automatic which is a military grade weapon.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/does-there-need-to-be-stricter-laws-for-gun-control
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851207116#19_1325666962
|
Title: Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control? | Debate.org
Headings:
Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control?
What emergency is there really?
Look at the statistics
Why would we need guns?
They are NEEDED
GUNS KILL PEOPLE
We absolutely need strict gun control!
I am against gun violence.
The Constitution of the United States Really Needs to be Edited.
How any more have to die?
School shootings are deadly
NO ! !
Actually learn some history.
More guns equals less crime
I could kill you with a pencil, ooh crap ban WRITING IMPLIMENTS!
Should we ban everything that poses a potential threat?
Gun laws will not make you safer.
I am Pro Gun.
Gun bans already exist and don't work
No, I disagree! NO gun control!!
Guns don't kill people; people kill people.
Load More Arguments
Content: Abt7217
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
Octopod
dmalvado
jalmaraz955
baren
YouSupidLiberals
awesomebaconluke
Madtomflint
killdeath19
PhillipWhitney
unopposed
17
19
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
More guns equals less crime
Since 1988, gun ownership has increased over 1200% while at the same time gun deaths and gun crimes in general have decreased by almost 60%. Instead of making stupid statements based on the lies of the 5 o'clock news, try doing some research. You will realize you have been lied to. All tyrannical governments want unarmed citizens, or slaves. Report Post
Like
Reply
Octopod
destinyisfate
dmalvado
baren
awesomebaconluke
awdennis
Madtomflint
killdeath19
DADRICBACON117
platitudinous
16
16
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
I could kill you with a pencil, ooh crap ban WRITING IMPLIMENTS! I read an article about this teenage boy that got beaten up in Chicago, by a gang of other teenagers. He was beaten by a piece of timber. Soon after, the story died, and wasn't revisited. However if that had been a gun, it would have been on the headlines, "Illegal weapon kills innocent teenager". If it was a gun, they would have added it to the list of "reasons why they should be banned".
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/does-there-need-to-be-stricter-laws-for-gun-control
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851207116#20_1325669234
|
Title: Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control? | Debate.org
Headings:
Does there need to be stricter laws for gun control?
What emergency is there really?
Look at the statistics
Why would we need guns?
They are NEEDED
GUNS KILL PEOPLE
We absolutely need strict gun control!
I am against gun violence.
The Constitution of the United States Really Needs to be Edited.
How any more have to die?
School shootings are deadly
NO ! !
Actually learn some history.
More guns equals less crime
I could kill you with a pencil, ooh crap ban WRITING IMPLIMENTS!
Should we ban everything that poses a potential threat?
Gun laws will not make you safer.
I am Pro Gun.
Gun bans already exist and don't work
No, I disagree! NO gun control!!
Guns don't kill people; people kill people.
Load More Arguments
Content: I read an article about this teenage boy that got beaten up in Chicago, by a gang of other teenagers. He was beaten by a piece of timber. Soon after, the story died, and wasn't revisited. However if that had been a gun, it would have been on the headlines, "Illegal weapon kills innocent teenager". If it was a gun, they would have added it to the list of "reasons why they should be banned". We didn't see this added to the list of the reasons why timber should be banned? We didn't see loggers charged for handing out dan
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/does-there-need-to-be-stricter-laws-for-gun-control
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851351803#17_1326056539
|
Title: In today's society, should people have a right to bear arms to protect themselves and their property? | Debate.org
Headings:
In today's society, should people have a right to bear arms to protect themselves and their property?
Youre not getting my guns!
I believe this is a fundamental right, although buying an AK-47 is not.
Why should we not
We have the right to self-defense .
guns are good
to important eyes
911 Whats Your Emergency?
What a coincidence!
Natural Rights of Mankind
People should have the right to bear arms to protect themselves and their property but there needs to be greater restrictions on the type and number of guns that people are allowed to use.
Nopey Nope Nuddah.
I object strongly to gun ownership, esp. by "responsible citizens."
17,664
Less guns, equals less murders
There are too many crazy people out there!
People kill people.
The U.S. Constitution does not allow the right to bear arms
Privilege Not A Right
The right to bear arms is an antiquated idea that should be removed from our Constitution.
Regular people are not qualified to make the decision about who gets to die.
Content: Gun laws should be in place so that there is a more comprehensive check on people buying guns and any person not working in law enforcement should be restricted to owning a low number of guns. It's important to enact stricter gun laws to protect the right to bear arms but also to protect society against growing violence. Posted by: RapidGarret59
Report Post
Like
Reply
michlliberty
1
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Nopey Nope Nuddah. Universal access to gun ownership is stupid, careless and irresponsible. A lot of Gun nutters have posted on this site and others and most of them from their statements demonstrate the danger of having guns universally accessible. There are the police to defend property and persons. That is their job, that is why they are issued police guns! Have a gun amnesty offer a fair price for the guns and ammunition then implement regulated gun control and make the crime of owning a gun punishable by a heavy sentence. Posted by:
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/in-todays-society-should-people-have-a-right-to-bear-arms-to-protect-themselves-and-their-property
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851532919#4_1326505626
|
Title: Is aid to Africa doing more harm than good? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is aid to Africa doing more harm than good?
They need to support themsleves
Africa bad leaders.
It is doing harm
Africa was doing fine when they were tribal. What we call "westernization" completely screwed up everything in Africa and the Middle East.
Jjjjjjjjj jjjjj jjj
They are doing nothing to help themselves
Yes we need to help them!!
S y d f u g h j k l p: a s d
GVBHJNMKL: SADaD AS
Cc c c c c c c c c
Its making thing worse
Save all the world!
Its harming people
My opinion on aid in Africa
People can spend thousands on dogs and cats or cars etc. but not a dime on a human life
Better live for Africa
They do not have anything to eat
Economy&business in africa
Help is not needed for these countries.
Only if Despots Get Hold of It
Content: Teach him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime”
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Africa bad leaders. We give them stuff and the government takes it for them self. So if we give them any money it won't go to the poor or the hungry the Africans government take it all for themes self so why would we give them any money if it's not going to a good cause. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
It is doing harm
The help we give makes our countries go down the hic countries already are in huge deficit to give what we don't have to countries which are not doing anything to become independent and feeling sorry for themselves we all started at the same point some used slavery some were doing trade to become further if Africa has dumb leaders then why are we still helping ??????? Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Africa was doing fine when they were tribal. What we call "westernization" completely screwed up everything in Africa and the Middle East. I realize that as Americans we believe capitalism and industrialization is the only correct way of life. The way we help them is supporting our way of life. One reason why several terrorist groups in 3rd world countries have been formed is because we get involved in their culture (an example of this is ISIS). Don't get me wrong, I think it's lovely that we try to help them and the people who go over to third world countries are heros, no doubt about it.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-aid-to-africa-doing-more-harm-than-good
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851532919#5_1326508173
|
Title: Is aid to Africa doing more harm than good? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is aid to Africa doing more harm than good?
They need to support themsleves
Africa bad leaders.
It is doing harm
Africa was doing fine when they were tribal. What we call "westernization" completely screwed up everything in Africa and the Middle East.
Jjjjjjjjj jjjjj jjj
They are doing nothing to help themselves
Yes we need to help them!!
S y d f u g h j k l p: a s d
GVBHJNMKL: SADaD AS
Cc c c c c c c c c
Its making thing worse
Save all the world!
Its harming people
My opinion on aid in Africa
People can spend thousands on dogs and cats or cars etc. but not a dime on a human life
Better live for Africa
They do not have anything to eat
Economy&business in africa
Help is not needed for these countries.
Only if Despots Get Hold of It
Content: What we call "westernization" completely screwed up everything in Africa and the Middle East. I realize that as Americans we believe capitalism and industrialization is the only correct way of life. The way we help them is supporting our way of life. One reason why several terrorist groups in 3rd world countries have been formed is because we get involved in their culture (an example of this is ISIS). Don't get me wrong, I think it's lovely that we try to help them and the people who go over to third world countries are heros, no doubt about it. Although just as you have to let go of your children when they're 18, as hard as it is, they have to learn on there own. After all, even if we've raised some peoples "standard of living" just a little bit, the key to life is to find happiness, right? 3rd world countries can never be happy if we continue meddling with their governments and culture. Another problem is when we say we're "helping" their nations we actually are just looking for oil money and then we don't clean up their land because it's cheaper for the oil company. In conclusion, we've screwed their lives up by importing our ideas about what is proper.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-aid-to-africa-doing-more-harm-than-good
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851766380#13_1327187648
|
Title: Is fashion harmful to society? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is fashion harmful to society?
It deviates youngsters from studies
At schools, girls have started to rank themselves with fashion.
People think fashion is so important because they always want to look good.
I believe fashion is harmful to society.
People are too bind to realize what fashion can do to person.
Fashion is not harmful to society as it simply personifies freedom
Fashion is the reason so many people are up to their neck in credit card debt.
Young girls are trying to emulate celebrities/models and can't differentiate the celebrity's "public persona" wardrobe from their everyday "at-home" wardrobe.
I feel that fashion is harmful to society, because it promotes a culture that is based solely on appearance.
Fashion is definitely harmful to society, because it inspires people to make potentially harmful lifestyle choices.
Fashion is art.
Fashion is not harmful to society.
Fashion shows a persons creativity.
Because all the people have the right to wear different kinds of fashionable clothes.
Fashion is walking art, it inspires to nto only to express yourself but also your culture and identity.
Fashion, in and of itself, is not harmful to society, but the emphasis placed on it is.
Fashion is showing people new ideas and, as such, can not be dangerous to society.
I don't see fashion as harmful to society at all, as it merely sets a standard that people may emulate if they want to.
No, fashion is not harmful to society because it is the main driving before behind the clothing industry.
Fashion is not harmful to society, as it is a form of art, and art benefits society.
Content: The answer is almost never. Not only will the store charge you $100 for that pair of jeans, they will let you pay more than that if you don't want to pay for it all right now. Fashion is the biggest scam in consumer product because their products are never worth what you have to pay to be fashionable. Posted by: R3ubHockey
Report Post
Like
Reply
Madara
Tanisha_Ganguly
anti_fashion_mag_teacher
karehmani
4
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Young girls are trying to emulate celebrities/models and can't differentiate the celebrity's "public persona" wardrobe from their everyday "at-home" wardrobe. Young girls look to celebrities and/or models when trying to figure out fashion. They see what is dished out to them from the media or from in-person events. They don't understand that much of what celebrities wear is worn specifically for the publicity. Some even for shock value just to get into the forefront of the public eye. They see models with unrealistic body shapes and think that to be beautiful and successful they too have to be unhealthily thin.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-fashion-harmful-to-society
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851766380#14_1327190598
|
Title: Is fashion harmful to society? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is fashion harmful to society?
It deviates youngsters from studies
At schools, girls have started to rank themselves with fashion.
People think fashion is so important because they always want to look good.
I believe fashion is harmful to society.
People are too bind to realize what fashion can do to person.
Fashion is not harmful to society as it simply personifies freedom
Fashion is the reason so many people are up to their neck in credit card debt.
Young girls are trying to emulate celebrities/models and can't differentiate the celebrity's "public persona" wardrobe from their everyday "at-home" wardrobe.
I feel that fashion is harmful to society, because it promotes a culture that is based solely on appearance.
Fashion is definitely harmful to society, because it inspires people to make potentially harmful lifestyle choices.
Fashion is art.
Fashion is not harmful to society.
Fashion shows a persons creativity.
Because all the people have the right to wear different kinds of fashionable clothes.
Fashion is walking art, it inspires to nto only to express yourself but also your culture and identity.
Fashion, in and of itself, is not harmful to society, but the emphasis placed on it is.
Fashion is showing people new ideas and, as such, can not be dangerous to society.
I don't see fashion as harmful to society at all, as it merely sets a standard that people may emulate if they want to.
No, fashion is not harmful to society because it is the main driving before behind the clothing industry.
Fashion is not harmful to society, as it is a form of art, and art benefits society.
Content: Young girls look to celebrities and/or models when trying to figure out fashion. They see what is dished out to them from the media or from in-person events. They don't understand that much of what celebrities wear is worn specifically for the publicity. Some even for shock value just to get into the forefront of the public eye. They see models with unrealistic body shapes and think that to be beautiful and successful they too have to be unhealthily thin. They don't know how many models are throwing up the only calories their bodies receive on a daily basis. They don't understand that celebrities that are dressing in body-hugging clothes and see-through tops are purposefully dressing that way because sex sells. Girls are so obsessed with being popular and accepted that they are trying to bypass being a girl and instead are trying to rush into being a woman. They aren't even getting the chance to figure out for themselves the stupidity of celebrities who spend a good sum of money walking in 9" stilettos or shoes without heels all for the sake of publicity. It is obvious that the celebrity is just hiding behind the same insecurity that the little girls have about being accepted and loved for who they are.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-fashion-harmful-to-society
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851766380#15_1327193700
|
Title: Is fashion harmful to society? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is fashion harmful to society?
It deviates youngsters from studies
At schools, girls have started to rank themselves with fashion.
People think fashion is so important because they always want to look good.
I believe fashion is harmful to society.
People are too bind to realize what fashion can do to person.
Fashion is not harmful to society as it simply personifies freedom
Fashion is the reason so many people are up to their neck in credit card debt.
Young girls are trying to emulate celebrities/models and can't differentiate the celebrity's "public persona" wardrobe from their everyday "at-home" wardrobe.
I feel that fashion is harmful to society, because it promotes a culture that is based solely on appearance.
Fashion is definitely harmful to society, because it inspires people to make potentially harmful lifestyle choices.
Fashion is art.
Fashion is not harmful to society.
Fashion shows a persons creativity.
Because all the people have the right to wear different kinds of fashionable clothes.
Fashion is walking art, it inspires to nto only to express yourself but also your culture and identity.
Fashion, in and of itself, is not harmful to society, but the emphasis placed on it is.
Fashion is showing people new ideas and, as such, can not be dangerous to society.
I don't see fashion as harmful to society at all, as it merely sets a standard that people may emulate if they want to.
No, fashion is not harmful to society because it is the main driving before behind the clothing industry.
Fashion is not harmful to society, as it is a form of art, and art benefits society.
Content: They don't know how many models are throwing up the only calories their bodies receive on a daily basis. They don't understand that celebrities that are dressing in body-hugging clothes and see-through tops are purposefully dressing that way because sex sells. Girls are so obsessed with being popular and accepted that they are trying to bypass being a girl and instead are trying to rush into being a woman. They aren't even getting the chance to figure out for themselves the stupidity of celebrities who spend a good sum of money walking in 9" stilettos or shoes without heels all for the sake of publicity. It is obvious that the celebrity is just hiding behind the same insecurity that the little girls have about being accepted and loved for who they are. For the record, people with real talent do not need to hide behind the facade of fashion absurdity. Report Post
Like
Reply
kayradavis
hijab
Tanisha_Ganguly
3
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
I feel that fashion is harmful to society, because it promotes a culture that is based solely on appearance. The fashion industry encourages an unrealistic outlook for men and women in regards to their bodies and their looks. Women and men have gone to great extremes to mold their bodies into what the fashion world has decided is "perfect", often disregarding their health and well-being, just to look like the air-brushed, rail-thin models that the industry has deemed beautiful. Posted by:
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-fashion-harmful-to-society
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_851816976#14_1327417324
|
Title: Is gender a social construct? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is gender a social construct?
Am I a Woman or Is That What I Have Been Told?
Yes, I guess?
Just open the textbook.
Gender is so fake
Yes, it is
Gender is constructed as evident through the cross cultural differences both temporal and spatial.
Mostly, yes.
Yes,
Let's Clarify some misconceptions here . . .
Sex is biological, Gender is not
Sex vs Gender
Gender is no longer needed
Gender is made up
62% of the world is wrong
Gender as social construct.
In some ways yes
Where are people getting there notions about gender?
Gender and Biological Sex are different
Gender's definition is different from biological sex
No, it isn't.
Yes, but ...
Gender is a social construct, Transexuals are not.
Gender is constructed by us
How do you feel a gender?
Gender and Sex, they're both different
Gender doesn't make a difference
We're told even before we leave the womb that we have to be within a binary.
Learning to behave
Gender is not universal and so must be socially constructed.
Read the definition lol
Almost certainly yes.
Obviously it is
It's a spectrum, not categorical
It seems clear to me that it is.
Just like money
Gender meaning gender roles.
Sex and gender are not the same thing.
No, not really
Gender and sex are two different things, and gender us the product of social conditioning.
We train girls to wear pink and boys to wear blue.
Social construction is more important for human beings.
Gender is real, but not inherent
Gender is stereotypical and doesn't exist
Bio major here
The social difference between males and females is made up by society.
"Gender" is a continuum
As a biologist
Gender is social
Of course it is.
Gender and Sex are different.
There is a difference between "sex" and "gender"
Social definition vs. biological definition.
Gender is constructed as evident through the cross cultural differences both temporal and spatial.
Gender is an idea: it is not tangible: it is abstract
If you don't know the difference between gender and sex, your argument is invalid.
Why do we treat boys and girls differently as a society if gender is not a social construct?
Gender is performance
Gender is mere performance
Its pretty easy to just look up the definitions of "sex" and "gender".
Bias scientific evidence
Gender and Sex are by definition different.
We connect gender to sex because of what we are told
It sure is.
Are there really only two genders?
Madafaka bitch bitch
No it is a personal construct.
The definitions are. . .
A social construct, But an unnecessary one.
It's a box
Gender is not the same universally.
Isn't it obvious?
I'd say yes, but why would we force anyone to fit our opinions?
Full offense but,
I would know
For good God's sake people...
Gender roles exist because we are humans and we come up for words to describe naturally occurring phenomena
Masculinity and femininity are
I shouldn't have to say anything
No, it is not
You are not me
Two words: David Reimer
Stop humoring mental illness.
Why is this even a question again?
No, gender is also determined by biology.
No. Please don't be silly.
Where is the evidence?
Gender isn't a social construct gender roles are
Kind Of But Not
Why are we even debating this?
Humans are one of the most sexually dimorphic species of mammals.
Gender is NOT a social construct
If gender is entirely a social construct how do trans people exist.
There's only 2 genders
The Word "Gender" is the problem
No gender is not a social construct.
Nope. It is not.
Gender isn't a social construct
Perhaps Gender Roles are socially constructed, but the concept of Gender has biological endorcement.
Why is this even a question?
It's a loaded question that only works if you already accept that gender is not synonymous with sex.
The nature of heterosexual reproduction
I hate all women
Gendered behaviour yes, gender no
Gender is both socially and biologically/psychologically determined.
You are not a blank state.
It's a bit of both, but mostly biological
Does logic not exist anymore?
No it isn't
Shut up feminists
Lol no its not
No no no
No, because saying that it is is neglecting facts.
Gender is a thing
Not A Decision
No, I don't think so.
It's simple biology.
You are either born male femal or some weird mutation of one or the other (this being the small minorty)
Not at all!!!
For good God's sake people...
For god sake
Biological links to gender
You are born
This is basic biology.
This is basic biology.
Gender is decided by chromosomes, not you.
Almost always it is biological
Gender comes from genetics, gender roles are social.
It is not, and will never be.
No, It isn't.
Gender isn't a social construct
Gender is biologically locked into our DNA from the moment of conception.
Because science and facts.
Because y'all are getting confused with masculinity and femininity
No it is not, Gender roles are though
David Reimer Case Study: Learn From A Mad Scientist's Failed Experiment
You can't make words mean anything you want them to mean.
Either male female
No arguement at all
Is skin color a social construct?
Two words: David Reimer
This is so stupid
Basic genetics people
Gender is not a social construct because it is intertwined with biological sexes.
Transgender people have confused the definition of masculine and feminine with male and female.
Gender is not, and will never be a social construct.
Gender is not.
Gender is not a social construct because:
Degobah System Says No
Gender roles in society are, of course, social construct
If true, social construction would be useless
Gender is not a social construct
Gender is defined by sexual characteristics
Not sure how this works?
No it isn't. What people say is socially constructed gender is actually just culture and actual gender is natural but transgenderism is real.
Gender is not a philosophical or mental construct
The word gender was redefined
Biology does not lie
Don't confuse biological gender with 'gender roles'
Biology its a real thing
No, gender is NOT a social construct.
It is retarded
Masculine and Feminine are not genders
Race and Gender
Hand Aja fkakfka
Why is this still a question
W h h h h
Gender dysphoria is a disorder.
A a a
Gender is deeper than one's self awareness
No it is a personal construct.
How could someone be born in the as the wrong gender if gender was a social construct?
Gender ROLES are a social construct, gender itself is not
Gender is not a social Construct but maybe Gender roles are! Don't get them confused.
You can not change your gender
Gender ROLES are a social construct
Gender is not a Social construct and here is why
Of course it's not.
Total Bullshit to say it is a social construct
A construct of genetics
This is a joke!
No Support for the new semantics
Gender is defined by nature
Why is this question even being asked??
Look at the animal kingdom
Hear we go again
It is simple biology
Gender is sexually neutral
Not really, no
Only a person who is rational and logical would say no.
Gender and sex again?
Ytfsd t fastd stdf
It's obviously not.
According to the dictionary gender is the state of being male or female.
No, you can't ignore biology.
Cognitive Dissonance Defined
Ever heard of sexual dimorphism?
Gender is biological
It's only biology
No, gender is not a social construct, gender is a matter of biology
No way bro.
This debate is just stupid
How is my penis a social construct?
Please do not substitute biology for fantasy.
Where is the evidence?
Only about .05% of People are Gender Dysphoric
Gender is something we perform
Content: Anthropologists that have studied cultures around the world know that a lot of the traditional gender roles we see in the west are just products of culture and not necessarily innate. For the most part, culture forces people into behaving in certain ways. That said, almost all cultures do end up having gender roles that, whatever they are, align with physical sex in some way. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes,
Gender and sex are not the same which are confused by many. Gender is a concept of behavior while sex is the biological part referencing genitalia. Because of this distinction between the two genders can be studied by comparing and contrasting many different societies. Anthropologist have done this many times in many studies. The fact is in definition gender and sex are different. While one can be seen easily the other is perceived by the person. Report Post
Like
Reply
1dvaladez
1
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Let's Clarify some misconceptions here . . .
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-gender-a-social-construct?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#0_1328430271
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Home > Opinions > Society > Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? Add a New Topic
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? Crime, Prevention, prostitution
Add a New Topic
Add to My Favorites
Debate This Topic
Report This Topic
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? Created: New to Old
Created: Old to New
Likes: Most to Least
Likes: Least to Most
Replies: Most to Least
Replies:
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#2_1328433021
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: Least to Most
58% Say Yes
42% Say No
Created: New to Old
Created: Old to New
Likes: Most to Least
Likes: Least to Most
Replies: Most to Least
Replies: Least to Most
Its a victimless crime
There is no difference between picking up a girl at a bar verse picking up a hooker or escort. Stop listening to police or religious views, if it was 100% legal there would be less pimps and more jobs, its your body your choice. There is no argument about this, the churches in the USA have puahed there views are full of bs.. Look at Amsterdam they dont have an issue....All thats needs to happen is it needs to regulated by health codes, the government wants to control every aspect of your life...
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime. In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that
prostitution is a victimless crime.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#3_1328434992
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: Most to Least
Replies: Least to Most
Its a victimless crime
There is no difference between picking up a girl at a bar verse picking up a hooker or escort. Stop listening to police or religious views, if it was 100% legal there would be less pimps and more jobs, its your body your choice. There is no argument about this, the churches in the USA have puahed there views are full of bs.. Look at Amsterdam they dont have an issue....All thats needs to happen is it needs to regulated by health codes, the government wants to control every aspect of your life...
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime. In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that
prostitution is a victimless crime. Who
is the victim? Prostitution is a
business agreement between two consenting adults to have sex for money. Both parties willingly participate. One is getting sexual satisfaction, and the
other is getting money for the act. What’s
the problem?
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#4_1328437082
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: Who
is the victim? Prostitution is a
business agreement between two consenting adults to have sex for money. Both parties willingly participate. One is getting sexual satisfaction, and the
other is getting money for the act. What’s
the problem? Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, I do believe that prostitution is a victimless crime. In fact I believe that prostitution should be legalized so that those that work in the profession pay taxes just like other working individuals. In the end, both of the parties, the prostitute and the customer, will participants. The only way I see prostitution having victim is if the girl is made to work in the profession against her will. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#5_1328438974
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, I do believe that prostitution is a victimless crime. In fact I believe that prostitution should be legalized so that those that work in the profession pay taxes just like other working individuals. In the end, both of the parties, the prostitute and the customer, will participants. The only way I see prostitution having victim is if the girl is made to work in the profession against her will. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes, and it should not be a crime. We can not exactly say it is victimless for many of the women who live this life are victims of society and have no way to support themselves or their children. Given that, though, if both adults are consenting to this type of business deal then it should not be prosecuted for it is victimless in that sense. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
For The Most Part
I believe that prostitution is a victimless crime. I believe there are women out there who chose to offer the service and they tend to collect hefty sums, they operate like a business and should be seen as a business. I believe women can be taken advantage of or possibly forced into the field, but I don't feel as though that is the same thing as general prostitution.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#6_1328441372
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: We can not exactly say it is victimless for many of the women who live this life are victims of society and have no way to support themselves or their children. Given that, though, if both adults are consenting to this type of business deal then it should not be prosecuted for it is victimless in that sense. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
For The Most Part
I believe that prostitution is a victimless crime. I believe there are women out there who chose to offer the service and they tend to collect hefty sums, they operate like a business and should be seen as a business. I believe women can be taken advantage of or possibly forced into the field, but I don't feel as though that is the same thing as general prostitution. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Technically there is nothing wrong with prostitution as long as both parties are engaging in the practice of their own free will. The issue though lies in the fact that prostitution can lead to a lot of negative effects on society that are not needed. So for the better of society it is best to keep it illegal. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Some women choose this. I did, it got me through college and I saved for a nice house in Boston.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#7_1328443742
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Technically there is nothing wrong with prostitution as long as both parties are engaging in the practice of their own free will. The issue though lies in the fact that prostitution can lead to a lot of negative effects on society that are not needed. So for the better of society it is best to keep it illegal. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Some women choose this. I did, it got me through college and I saved for a nice house in Boston. My kids will have a better life as I'll have no mortgage, saved $2 million in 9 years, bought a house, and have over a million in stocks. I have a good job now and graduated Boston College. Frankly, I'd rather have sex with a guy for an hour even if he's an ogre than work 20 hours making lattes and sandwiches in a cafe. My husband knows and thinks it was smart, though I married after I stopped. It was the best decision I ever made, improved my GPA, freed up time, I traveled and saw the world.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#9_1328447971
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: To me, sex is just an act, I'm not religious, and I enjoyed FWBs and casual sex and bi sex a lot in my early '20s. At 22, I thought, I'm hot, why not get paid, did it till 30, now I'm 32, graduated Boston College, have a good degree. My kids will live in a world class City and go to Boston Latin, one of the best public high schools in the country, see the world, and not live in boring suburbs with a mortgage, all that money each month I'll have for them. I had a better GPA, graduated Boston College, best choice I ever made. I had no money and would have dropped out of school. I hurt no one. Men were happy, so was I, they got to avoid dating and being controlled, I had fun too and made great money, win win, pure choice, never molested, never abused, my choice, my body, stay out of it. I have no STDs, made a lot of people happy and myself. No one was hurt. I'm surprised any woman wouldn't do it but I'm glad they don't, or I'd have made a lot less.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#10_1328449971
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: I hurt no one. Men were happy, so was I, they got to avoid dating and being controlled, I had fun too and made great money, win win, pure choice, never molested, never abused, my choice, my body, stay out of it. I have no STDs, made a lot of people happy and myself. No one was hurt. I'm surprised any woman wouldn't do it but I'm glad they don't, or I'd have made a lot less. Posted by: MariahLopez
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
MariahLopez
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes, some women take sex more lightly. Not everyone is religious. For some women, and men, particularly younger ones, sex is just a thing to do. Sure, some women are forced into it by pimps, and the pimps should go to jail for rape if they forced them.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#11_1328451750
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: Posted by: MariahLopez
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
MariahLopez
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes, some women take sex more lightly. Not everyone is religious. For some women, and men, particularly younger ones, sex is just a thing to do. Sure, some women are forced into it by pimps, and the pimps should go to jail for rape if they forced them. Some are on drugs. But you are really making a leap if you just blindly assume not a single woman would rather have safe sex for one hour than work in a cafe for 20 hours or more making lattes and sandwiches. Many women would rather be in poverty because sex is deeply personal and meaningful, sure, but many others have friends with benefits/FWB, one night stands, sugar daddies, so prostitution is a small step up. Same with stripping and lap dances with touching. Most women would not do this, but many would prefer to have a better GPA in college or dedicate time to artistic pursuits or just have more money saved to buy a house when young, or simply are lazy and would rather work 5 hours a week doing something they find fun or at least bearable than be chaste and work long hours in a dead end job.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#12_1328453959
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: Some are on drugs. But you are really making a leap if you just blindly assume not a single woman would rather have safe sex for one hour than work in a cafe for 20 hours or more making lattes and sandwiches. Many women would rather be in poverty because sex is deeply personal and meaningful, sure, but many others have friends with benefits/FWB, one night stands, sugar daddies, so prostitution is a small step up. Same with stripping and lap dances with touching. Most women would not do this, but many would prefer to have a better GPA in college or dedicate time to artistic pursuits or just have more money saved to buy a house when young, or simply are lazy and would rather work 5 hours a week doing something they find fun or at least bearable than be chaste and work long hours in a dead end job. If there were no traffickers or pimps, it wouldn't disapear, the prices would just go up, which is already happening. In any free society, some women would prefer to earn 2-300 an hour and 1500 a day and half a million a year, or just have low volume and make 50k for 5 experiences a week, which many women have for free, and have more free time. Some hot women are paid 500. You can't think for all women. I know, because I did this for 9 years and later married and had kids and have a normal life.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#13_1328456308
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: If there were no traffickers or pimps, it wouldn't disapear, the prices would just go up, which is already happening. In any free society, some women would prefer to earn 2-300 an hour and 1500 a day and half a million a year, or just have low volume and make 50k for 5 experiences a week, which many women have for free, and have more free time. Some hot women are paid 500. You can't think for all women. I know, because I did this for 9 years and later married and had kids and have a normal life. I saved up and bought a house in Boston and my kids will go to Boston Latin, one of the best high schools in the country, and have a great childhood in a cultural, great City, and I'm so happy I saved $2 million cash when I was young and graduated from a great University, Boston College. I have a great career now. Sex means nothing to me. You aren't inside all of our heads. I was never molested and I was never forced.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#15_1328460091
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: I enjoy sex and learning about men. It was fun. And many men were greatful to me for the convenience and didn't want to be controlled by women, lie to women, or go on 3 dates, they just wanted NSA and couldn't get someone of my appearance or at least not without a whole lot of stress. Plus I got very understanding of men and very good at sex. Posted by: MariahLopez
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
getreal19783
MariahLopez
2
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
The fact that some people are forced into an act is totally irrelevant to whether there should be a law forbidding voluntarily engaging in the act. And the idea that nobody could possibly ever voluntarily engage in the act is a delusion - it's a way for people who would never make that choice themselves to project their own views onto others. A century ago, Homosexuality wasn't considered voluntary, In that it was considered a disorder. We know that people - including people with advanced degrees and certifications that you probably don't have, Such as CPA, Leave those nerdy professions for porn (e. G. , Veruca James). Porn is prostitution for an audience - a meaningless distinction that somehow makes it legal (which illustrates the farcical distinctions between what is and isn't legal).
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#16_1328462436
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: MariahLopez
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
getreal19783
MariahLopez
2
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
The fact that some people are forced into an act is totally irrelevant to whether there should be a law forbidding voluntarily engaging in the act. And the idea that nobody could possibly ever voluntarily engage in the act is a delusion - it's a way for people who would never make that choice themselves to project their own views onto others. A century ago, Homosexuality wasn't considered voluntary, In that it was considered a disorder. We know that people - including people with advanced degrees and certifications that you probably don't have, Such as CPA, Leave those nerdy professions for porn (e. G. , Veruca James). Porn is prostitution for an audience - a meaningless distinction that somehow makes it legal (which illustrates the farcical distinctions between what is and isn't legal). And the current trend of masking old fashioned Puritanical views with the cloak of fake feminism is nauseating. Either your position is "my body = my choice" or it's not. If that applies only to choices that make you feel fuzzy, Then it's not really your position. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Prostitution teaches skills. Hookers learn how to please a man.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#17_1328464817
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: And the current trend of masking old fashioned Puritanical views with the cloak of fake feminism is nauseating. Either your position is "my body = my choice" or it's not. If that applies only to choices that make you feel fuzzy, Then it's not really your position. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Prostitution teaches skills. Hookers learn how to please a man. When the time comes, they are going to be a good wife in bed. Sex is important. If she can please her man, he will provide for her. Such a situation is a win win for all concerned. Prostitution should be truly mandatory.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#18_1328466471
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: When the time comes, they are going to be a good wife in bed. Sex is important. If she can please her man, he will provide for her. Such a situation is a win win for all concerned. Prostitution should be truly mandatory. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No. Prostitution always has a victim. No. Prostitution is never without a victim, and quite often, the victim is the prostitute. Most often, the decision to become a prostitute is made out of necessity only.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#19_1328468002
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No. Prostitution always has a victim. No. Prostitution is never without a victim, and quite often, the victim is the prostitute. Most often, the decision to become a prostitute is made out of necessity only. This decision often comes with the loss of freedom due to "pimp" representation, induced drug addiction, and sexually transmitted disease. I'd say the prostitutes have it worse than the people that pay for their services. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No. Prostitution always has a victim. No.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#20_1328469639
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: This decision often comes with the loss of freedom due to "pimp" representation, induced drug addiction, and sexually transmitted disease. I'd say the prostitutes have it worse than the people that pay for their services. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No. Prostitution always has a victim. No. Prostitution is not a victimless crime. Prostitutes are most often driven to their profession by way of having no other choice. In many cases, prostitutes are controlled by someone who is able to procure their clients. This is a form of abduction since that person is able to hold the prostitute "hostage" to her money and her life style. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No, it's not a victimless crime.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852341239#21_1328471442
|
Title: Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is Prostitution a Victimless Crime?
Its a victimless crime
In my heart of hearts, I definitely believe that prostitution is a victimless crime.
Both parties are willing participants
Yes, and it should not be a crime.
For The Most Part
Yes but it could lead to worse things
Some women choose this.
Yes, some women take sex more lightly.
Lincoln Didn't Outlaw Cotton Farming
Prostitution teaches skills.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No. Prostitution always has a victim.
No, it's not a victimless crime.
Prostitution is not a victim-less crime
No, the vast majority of prostitutes are exploited and coerced into service.
I think this is one the oldest profession in the world.
The majority of victims are women and children
Is prostitution victimless
Content: Prostitution is not a victimless crime. Prostitutes are most often driven to their profession by way of having no other choice. In many cases, prostitutes are controlled by someone who is able to procure their clients. This is a form of abduction since that person is able to hold the prostitute "hostage" to her money and her life style. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No, it's not a victimless crime. It is rarely the media-approved version of prostitution, a sexy and highly-paid adventure
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-a-victimless-crime
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852355977#8_1328485187
|
Title: Is prostitution morally wrong? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is prostitution morally wrong?
Prostitution is just downright gross
Prostitution makes a woman's life hell
Prostitution is disgusting
Prostitution is immoral
Sex should be between lovers
Morally yes
Wroooong in all ways
No argument needed
Poor use of talents
Liberalism means no morality.
Consenting adults are more natural that the repressive environment of the 'moral' crowd.
Because of family
I do not think so
Prostitution is not worse than...
Sex has always been a currency.
Not in itself.
Prostitution is morally not wrong.
It is not immoral.
Irrational Stigma Towards Prostitution
Prostitution should be legal
Content: There are many innocent victims lured into it because of poverty. It has become a means to an end for drug addicts. It is exploitative and dangerous. It tears away self respect and dignity. Both men and women need to stand up and have some self respect and dignity. Report Post
Like
Reply
spiffy_musiclover
1
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Prostitution is immoral
Prostitution is an immoral enterprise, that should not become legal in the United States of America. Prostitution often involves coercion. Many times people become prostitutes only because they are homeless, uneducated, and lacked good opportunities in life. Also, prostitution often is exploitative in that the pimp or madam does very little and takes most of the profit. Also, prostitution is degrading to the woman, as they are treated as mere objects.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-morally-wrong
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852376319#5_1328542058
|
Title: Is prostitution morally wrong? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is prostitution morally wrong?
Prostitution is just downright gross
Prostitution makes a woman's life hell
Prostitution is disgusting
Prostitution is immoral
Sex should be between lovers
Morally yes
Wroooong in all ways
No argument needed
Poor use of talents
Liberalism means no morality.
The danger involved
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
It is wrong in every way
Why prostitution is wrong?
Corruption, exploitation and deception
It is wrong!!
Hookers spread disease
It is wrong.
Prostitution causes disorder in the individual and the cosmos
It's objectifying women
Prostitution is probably wrong but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Prostitution can affect anyone who isn't part of that physical intercourse of 15 minutes.
Paying to Rape
There's a reason people don't want it legalized!
Prostitution Increases Human Trafficking Inflows!
Corrupts the Equality of Sexes
We really to change our laws.
Your body is not your choice
It doesn't do good for anyone.
Porn is Prostitution
Prostitution is trashing your inner self.
Gender equality and poverty.
Have You Ever Met a Happy Prostitute
Of course it's morally wrong
Prostitution is morally wrong
Prostitution destroys how we see one another as human beings.
It is not god wants
What is wrong with u all??
Dangerous and greedy
Stop it ASAP
Treating women (or a child or anyone) as an object is wrong
Disgusting and immoral
Prostitution is wrong
If it is so good....
Morally yes but legally no.
Its morally wrong
Prostitution MORALLY unacceptable...
I did your mom
Street prostitutes kills chastity in men and making women a sex object.
It's completely wrong
I have as much problem with prositution as with ordering a pizza
Read the Bible
You Do Not Know Where Your Money Is Going To
It's incredibly wrong
Sex has consequences.
It's morally wrong
Get some self respect
Consenting adults are more natural that the repressive environment of the 'moral' crowd.
Because of family
I do not think so
Prostitution is not worse than...
Sex has always been a currency.
Not in itself.
Prostitution is morally not wrong.
It is not immoral.
Irrational Stigma Towards Prostitution
Prostitution should be legal
No, prostitution is not morally wrong.
No it's a choice
Prostitution is not morally wrong because the exchange of sex for money is wrong depending on the merits of its nature and circumstance.
Prostitution is just fine
Prostitution is not Immoral
Not morally wrong
If it's a free choice it's fine
Your body your choice
Prostitution is just a trade, there's nothing wrong morally of engaging in a trade
Prostitution is just a trade
No it is not
Why are some people so hung up on prostitution?
It is Moral but regulate it
Just another business transaction.
Prostitution is [negative adjective]"
Prostitution is absolutely normal, and it will ALWAYS exist
A subject of only how people perceives it....
Morality depends on each and every individual
Consent is key
We are all responsible
Everything is contract in some ways
Its just sex
I do t think prostitution is wrong
Not bad if no one is mistreated
It's a service, just as any other.
Prostitution isn't morally wrong
It all comes down to the stigma
I say no
Its their choice freedom is their right
It is morally wrong to control another person's freedom of agency.
It depends on the individual
It's Not a problem.
It's my body.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced and used correctly.
It's my hot body I do what I want
Its the best
Consentual Prostitution is not wrong
Life is a constant negotiation of power and money and people sell themselves everyday in many ways that don't involve sex. Sex is no different.
It's there choice?
Sex is the one being criminalized.
America's Repression of the Female Body
Its there choice
One's definition of morality is different from another
Consenting sex between Adults harms no one
Prostitution is a very honest transaction.
Morally not wrong
Prostitution is not by nature morally wrong. Regulation is the issue that needs to be discussed.
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
You're not selling yourself
What has legalization done for it?
To each their own
We go through life being told by our peers and elders to do what we want to do.
Demand and Option
More moral than most activities
What is marriage?
What goes on between CONSENTING adults, is nobody's business.
It's Your Body
It's disgusting sometimes, but not morally wrong.
Free Market Capitalism
It should be legal.
Content: It takes away a woman's ability to earn money, or make a home, or be cherished by a husband or partner. It ruins her reputation. It takes her chance to practise spiritual feelings about stuff. It leaves the woman with bad memories, held deeply in her biological and emotional feelings about herself. It degrades her normal relationships. It forces her to have sexual experiences with people she doesn't like. It forces a woman to treat her body/figure/appearance like a cheap commodity, rather than than treating herself like a human being with feelings, emotions and spiritual sentiments. It exploits a woman's personality, so she has to give continuously/artificially. It takes time/space from raising children. It even turns children away from women.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-morally-wrong?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852376319#7_1328554091
|
Title: Is prostitution morally wrong? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is prostitution morally wrong?
Prostitution is just downright gross
Prostitution makes a woman's life hell
Prostitution is disgusting
Prostitution is immoral
Sex should be between lovers
Morally yes
Wroooong in all ways
No argument needed
Poor use of talents
Liberalism means no morality.
The danger involved
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
It is wrong in every way
Why prostitution is wrong?
Corruption, exploitation and deception
It is wrong!!
Hookers spread disease
It is wrong.
Prostitution causes disorder in the individual and the cosmos
It's objectifying women
Prostitution is probably wrong but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Prostitution can affect anyone who isn't part of that physical intercourse of 15 minutes.
Paying to Rape
There's a reason people don't want it legalized!
Prostitution Increases Human Trafficking Inflows!
Corrupts the Equality of Sexes
We really to change our laws.
Your body is not your choice
It doesn't do good for anyone.
Porn is Prostitution
Prostitution is trashing your inner self.
Gender equality and poverty.
Have You Ever Met a Happy Prostitute
Of course it's morally wrong
Prostitution is morally wrong
Prostitution destroys how we see one another as human beings.
It is not god wants
What is wrong with u all??
Dangerous and greedy
Stop it ASAP
Treating women (or a child or anyone) as an object is wrong
Disgusting and immoral
Prostitution is wrong
If it is so good....
Morally yes but legally no.
Its morally wrong
Prostitution MORALLY unacceptable...
I did your mom
Street prostitutes kills chastity in men and making women a sex object.
It's completely wrong
I have as much problem with prositution as with ordering a pizza
Read the Bible
You Do Not Know Where Your Money Is Going To
It's incredibly wrong
Sex has consequences.
It's morally wrong
Get some self respect
Consenting adults are more natural that the repressive environment of the 'moral' crowd.
Because of family
I do not think so
Prostitution is not worse than...
Sex has always been a currency.
Not in itself.
Prostitution is morally not wrong.
It is not immoral.
Irrational Stigma Towards Prostitution
Prostitution should be legal
No, prostitution is not morally wrong.
No it's a choice
Prostitution is not morally wrong because the exchange of sex for money is wrong depending on the merits of its nature and circumstance.
Prostitution is just fine
Prostitution is not Immoral
Not morally wrong
If it's a free choice it's fine
Your body your choice
Prostitution is just a trade, there's nothing wrong morally of engaging in a trade
Prostitution is just a trade
No it is not
Why are some people so hung up on prostitution?
It is Moral but regulate it
Just another business transaction.
Prostitution is [negative adjective]"
Prostitution is absolutely normal, and it will ALWAYS exist
A subject of only how people perceives it....
Morality depends on each and every individual
Consent is key
We are all responsible
Everything is contract in some ways
Its just sex
I do t think prostitution is wrong
Not bad if no one is mistreated
It's a service, just as any other.
Prostitution isn't morally wrong
It all comes down to the stigma
I say no
Its their choice freedom is their right
It is morally wrong to control another person's freedom of agency.
It depends on the individual
It's Not a problem.
It's my body.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced and used correctly.
It's my hot body I do what I want
Its the best
Consentual Prostitution is not wrong
Life is a constant negotiation of power and money and people sell themselves everyday in many ways that don't involve sex. Sex is no different.
It's there choice?
Sex is the one being criminalized.
America's Repression of the Female Body
Its there choice
One's definition of morality is different from another
Consenting sex between Adults harms no one
Prostitution is a very honest transaction.
Morally not wrong
Prostitution is not by nature morally wrong. Regulation is the issue that needs to be discussed.
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
You're not selling yourself
What has legalization done for it?
To each their own
We go through life being told by our peers and elders to do what we want to do.
Demand and Option
More moral than most activities
What is marriage?
What goes on between CONSENTING adults, is nobody's business.
It's Your Body
It's disgusting sometimes, but not morally wrong.
Free Market Capitalism
It should be legal.
Content: And in the background of her mind, she has to worry if she is disapproved by God/Universe and if there is an afterlife. It wastes everything and creates a terrible situation for her soul re: her relationship to God and Wholesomeness. Report Post
Like
Reply
spiffy_musiclover
1
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Prostitution is disgusting
It is nothing more than human trafficking. There are many innocent victims lured into it because of poverty. It has become a means to an end for drug addicts. It is exploitative and dangerous. It tears away self respect and dignity. Both men and women need to stand up and have some self respect and dignity. Report Post
Like
Reply
spiffy_musiclover
1
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Prostitution is immoral
Prostitution is an immoral enterprise, that should not become legal in the United States of America.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-morally-wrong?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852376319#8_1328560154
|
Title: Is prostitution morally wrong? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is prostitution morally wrong?
Prostitution is just downright gross
Prostitution makes a woman's life hell
Prostitution is disgusting
Prostitution is immoral
Sex should be between lovers
Morally yes
Wroooong in all ways
No argument needed
Poor use of talents
Liberalism means no morality.
The danger involved
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
It is wrong in every way
Why prostitution is wrong?
Corruption, exploitation and deception
It is wrong!!
Hookers spread disease
It is wrong.
Prostitution causes disorder in the individual and the cosmos
It's objectifying women
Prostitution is probably wrong but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Prostitution can affect anyone who isn't part of that physical intercourse of 15 minutes.
Paying to Rape
There's a reason people don't want it legalized!
Prostitution Increases Human Trafficking Inflows!
Corrupts the Equality of Sexes
We really to change our laws.
Your body is not your choice
It doesn't do good for anyone.
Porn is Prostitution
Prostitution is trashing your inner self.
Gender equality and poverty.
Have You Ever Met a Happy Prostitute
Of course it's morally wrong
Prostitution is morally wrong
Prostitution destroys how we see one another as human beings.
It is not god wants
What is wrong with u all??
Dangerous and greedy
Stop it ASAP
Treating women (or a child or anyone) as an object is wrong
Disgusting and immoral
Prostitution is wrong
If it is so good....
Morally yes but legally no.
Its morally wrong
Prostitution MORALLY unacceptable...
I did your mom
Street prostitutes kills chastity in men and making women a sex object.
It's completely wrong
I have as much problem with prositution as with ordering a pizza
Read the Bible
You Do Not Know Where Your Money Is Going To
It's incredibly wrong
Sex has consequences.
It's morally wrong
Get some self respect
Consenting adults are more natural that the repressive environment of the 'moral' crowd.
Because of family
I do not think so
Prostitution is not worse than...
Sex has always been a currency.
Not in itself.
Prostitution is morally not wrong.
It is not immoral.
Irrational Stigma Towards Prostitution
Prostitution should be legal
No, prostitution is not morally wrong.
No it's a choice
Prostitution is not morally wrong because the exchange of sex for money is wrong depending on the merits of its nature and circumstance.
Prostitution is just fine
Prostitution is not Immoral
Not morally wrong
If it's a free choice it's fine
Your body your choice
Prostitution is just a trade, there's nothing wrong morally of engaging in a trade
Prostitution is just a trade
No it is not
Why are some people so hung up on prostitution?
It is Moral but regulate it
Just another business transaction.
Prostitution is [negative adjective]"
Prostitution is absolutely normal, and it will ALWAYS exist
A subject of only how people perceives it....
Morality depends on each and every individual
Consent is key
We are all responsible
Everything is contract in some ways
Its just sex
I do t think prostitution is wrong
Not bad if no one is mistreated
It's a service, just as any other.
Prostitution isn't morally wrong
It all comes down to the stigma
I say no
Its their choice freedom is their right
It is morally wrong to control another person's freedom of agency.
It depends on the individual
It's Not a problem.
It's my body.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced and used correctly.
It's my hot body I do what I want
Its the best
Consentual Prostitution is not wrong
Life is a constant negotiation of power and money and people sell themselves everyday in many ways that don't involve sex. Sex is no different.
It's there choice?
Sex is the one being criminalized.
America's Repression of the Female Body
Its there choice
One's definition of morality is different from another
Consenting sex between Adults harms no one
Prostitution is a very honest transaction.
Morally not wrong
Prostitution is not by nature morally wrong. Regulation is the issue that needs to be discussed.
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
You're not selling yourself
What has legalization done for it?
To each their own
We go through life being told by our peers and elders to do what we want to do.
Demand and Option
More moral than most activities
What is marriage?
What goes on between CONSENTING adults, is nobody's business.
It's Your Body
It's disgusting sometimes, but not morally wrong.
Free Market Capitalism
It should be legal.
Content: It has become a means to an end for drug addicts. It is exploitative and dangerous. It tears away self respect and dignity. Both men and women need to stand up and have some self respect and dignity. Report Post
Like
Reply
spiffy_musiclover
1
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Prostitution is immoral
Prostitution is an immoral enterprise, that should not become legal in the United States of America. Prostitution often involves coercion. Many times people become prostitutes only because they are homeless, uneducated, and lacked good opportunities in life. Also, prostitution often is exploitative in that the pimp or madam does very little and takes most of the profit. Also, prostitution is degrading to the woman, as they are treated as mere objects. Prostitution is an immoral behavior that I hope to God doesn't become legal in this great country.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-morally-wrong?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852376319#9_1328566220
|
Title: Is prostitution morally wrong? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is prostitution morally wrong?
Prostitution is just downright gross
Prostitution makes a woman's life hell
Prostitution is disgusting
Prostitution is immoral
Sex should be between lovers
Morally yes
Wroooong in all ways
No argument needed
Poor use of talents
Liberalism means no morality.
The danger involved
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
It is wrong in every way
Why prostitution is wrong?
Corruption, exploitation and deception
It is wrong!!
Hookers spread disease
It is wrong.
Prostitution causes disorder in the individual and the cosmos
It's objectifying women
Prostitution is probably wrong but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Prostitution can affect anyone who isn't part of that physical intercourse of 15 minutes.
Paying to Rape
There's a reason people don't want it legalized!
Prostitution Increases Human Trafficking Inflows!
Corrupts the Equality of Sexes
We really to change our laws.
Your body is not your choice
It doesn't do good for anyone.
Porn is Prostitution
Prostitution is trashing your inner self.
Gender equality and poverty.
Have You Ever Met a Happy Prostitute
Of course it's morally wrong
Prostitution is morally wrong
Prostitution destroys how we see one another as human beings.
It is not god wants
What is wrong with u all??
Dangerous and greedy
Stop it ASAP
Treating women (or a child or anyone) as an object is wrong
Disgusting and immoral
Prostitution is wrong
If it is so good....
Morally yes but legally no.
Its morally wrong
Prostitution MORALLY unacceptable...
I did your mom
Street prostitutes kills chastity in men and making women a sex object.
It's completely wrong
I have as much problem with prositution as with ordering a pizza
Read the Bible
You Do Not Know Where Your Money Is Going To
It's incredibly wrong
Sex has consequences.
It's morally wrong
Get some self respect
Consenting adults are more natural that the repressive environment of the 'moral' crowd.
Because of family
I do not think so
Prostitution is not worse than...
Sex has always been a currency.
Not in itself.
Prostitution is morally not wrong.
It is not immoral.
Irrational Stigma Towards Prostitution
Prostitution should be legal
No, prostitution is not morally wrong.
No it's a choice
Prostitution is not morally wrong because the exchange of sex for money is wrong depending on the merits of its nature and circumstance.
Prostitution is just fine
Prostitution is not Immoral
Not morally wrong
If it's a free choice it's fine
Your body your choice
Prostitution is just a trade, there's nothing wrong morally of engaging in a trade
Prostitution is just a trade
No it is not
Why are some people so hung up on prostitution?
It is Moral but regulate it
Just another business transaction.
Prostitution is [negative adjective]"
Prostitution is absolutely normal, and it will ALWAYS exist
A subject of only how people perceives it....
Morality depends on each and every individual
Consent is key
We are all responsible
Everything is contract in some ways
Its just sex
I do t think prostitution is wrong
Not bad if no one is mistreated
It's a service, just as any other.
Prostitution isn't morally wrong
It all comes down to the stigma
I say no
Its their choice freedom is their right
It is morally wrong to control another person's freedom of agency.
It depends on the individual
It's Not a problem.
It's my body.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced and used correctly.
It's my hot body I do what I want
Its the best
Consentual Prostitution is not wrong
Life is a constant negotiation of power and money and people sell themselves everyday in many ways that don't involve sex. Sex is no different.
It's there choice?
Sex is the one being criminalized.
America's Repression of the Female Body
Its there choice
One's definition of morality is different from another
Consenting sex between Adults harms no one
Prostitution is a very honest transaction.
Morally not wrong
Prostitution is not by nature morally wrong. Regulation is the issue that needs to be discussed.
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
You're not selling yourself
What has legalization done for it?
To each their own
We go through life being told by our peers and elders to do what we want to do.
Demand and Option
More moral than most activities
What is marriage?
What goes on between CONSENTING adults, is nobody's business.
It's Your Body
It's disgusting sometimes, but not morally wrong.
Free Market Capitalism
It should be legal.
Content: Prostitution often involves coercion. Many times people become prostitutes only because they are homeless, uneducated, and lacked good opportunities in life. Also, prostitution often is exploitative in that the pimp or madam does very little and takes most of the profit. Also, prostitution is degrading to the woman, as they are treated as mere objects. Prostitution is an immoral behavior that I hope to God doesn't become legal in this great country. Posted by: Jesuslastsupper
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
spiffy_musiclover
1
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Sex should be between lovers
If it's a matter of morals, prostitution is definitely wrong. We shouldn't be teaching others that it is an acceptable way of life. Selling your body for material gain is unacceptable. It spreads diseases and completely demolishes the ideas of companionship and love.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-morally-wrong?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852376319#13_1328590752
|
Title: Is prostitution morally wrong? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is prostitution morally wrong?
Prostitution is just downright gross
Prostitution makes a woman's life hell
Prostitution is disgusting
Prostitution is immoral
Sex should be between lovers
Morally yes
Wroooong in all ways
No argument needed
Poor use of talents
Liberalism means no morality.
The danger involved
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
It is wrong in every way
Why prostitution is wrong?
Corruption, exploitation and deception
It is wrong!!
Hookers spread disease
It is wrong.
Prostitution causes disorder in the individual and the cosmos
It's objectifying women
Prostitution is probably wrong but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Prostitution can affect anyone who isn't part of that physical intercourse of 15 minutes.
Paying to Rape
There's a reason people don't want it legalized!
Prostitution Increases Human Trafficking Inflows!
Corrupts the Equality of Sexes
We really to change our laws.
Your body is not your choice
It doesn't do good for anyone.
Porn is Prostitution
Prostitution is trashing your inner self.
Gender equality and poverty.
Have You Ever Met a Happy Prostitute
Of course it's morally wrong
Prostitution is morally wrong
Prostitution destroys how we see one another as human beings.
It is not god wants
What is wrong with u all??
Dangerous and greedy
Stop it ASAP
Treating women (or a child or anyone) as an object is wrong
Disgusting and immoral
Prostitution is wrong
If it is so good....
Morally yes but legally no.
Its morally wrong
Prostitution MORALLY unacceptable...
I did your mom
Street prostitutes kills chastity in men and making women a sex object.
It's completely wrong
I have as much problem with prositution as with ordering a pizza
Read the Bible
You Do Not Know Where Your Money Is Going To
It's incredibly wrong
Sex has consequences.
It's morally wrong
Get some self respect
Consenting adults are more natural that the repressive environment of the 'moral' crowd.
Because of family
I do not think so
Prostitution is not worse than...
Sex has always been a currency.
Not in itself.
Prostitution is morally not wrong.
It is not immoral.
Irrational Stigma Towards Prostitution
Prostitution should be legal
No, prostitution is not morally wrong.
No it's a choice
Prostitution is not morally wrong because the exchange of sex for money is wrong depending on the merits of its nature and circumstance.
Prostitution is just fine
Prostitution is not Immoral
Not morally wrong
If it's a free choice it's fine
Your body your choice
Prostitution is just a trade, there's nothing wrong morally of engaging in a trade
Prostitution is just a trade
No it is not
Why are some people so hung up on prostitution?
It is Moral but regulate it
Just another business transaction.
Prostitution is [negative adjective]"
Prostitution is absolutely normal, and it will ALWAYS exist
A subject of only how people perceives it....
Morality depends on each and every individual
Consent is key
We are all responsible
Everything is contract in some ways
Its just sex
I do t think prostitution is wrong
Not bad if no one is mistreated
It's a service, just as any other.
Prostitution isn't morally wrong
It all comes down to the stigma
I say no
Its their choice freedom is their right
It is morally wrong to control another person's freedom of agency.
It depends on the individual
It's Not a problem.
It's my body.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced and used correctly.
It's my hot body I do what I want
Its the best
Consentual Prostitution is not wrong
Life is a constant negotiation of power and money and people sell themselves everyday in many ways that don't involve sex. Sex is no different.
It's there choice?
Sex is the one being criminalized.
America's Repression of the Female Body
Its there choice
One's definition of morality is different from another
Consenting sex between Adults harms no one
Prostitution is a very honest transaction.
Morally not wrong
Prostitution is not by nature morally wrong. Regulation is the issue that needs to be discussed.
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
You're not selling yourself
What has legalization done for it?
To each their own
We go through life being told by our peers and elders to do what we want to do.
Demand and Option
More moral than most activities
What is marriage?
What goes on between CONSENTING adults, is nobody's business.
It's Your Body
It's disgusting sometimes, but not morally wrong.
Free Market Capitalism
It should be legal.
Content: Prostitution is wrong. Not because it is inherently wrong, but because at the current time it undermines the equality of women. Report Post
Like
Reply
spiffy_musiclover
1
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No argument needed
Lets be real with ourselves,
if you took a moment to step back and ask yourself "is this okay?" and honestly just instantaneously said yes, then thats you and you have to live with yourself. But chances are you had to come up with a number of reasons to justify it. If you ever have to come up with a plethora of reasons to explain whats moral or immoral, chances are its because its immoral and you have to rationalize it. For those looking for empirical answers of some sort, go feed yourself that pat on the back corndog you want so badly, because you might not get one. This is one of those things that are generally felt with a clear right or wrong. Perhaps that instinctive feeling of right and wrong may come from upbringing, but perhaps that happened for a good reason. Just because one can argue better, doesnt mean that the right answer cannot be derived from an inherent feeling we all know we have.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-morally-wrong?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852376319#17_1328615551
|
Title: Is prostitution morally wrong? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is prostitution morally wrong?
Prostitution is just downright gross
Prostitution makes a woman's life hell
Prostitution is disgusting
Prostitution is immoral
Sex should be between lovers
Morally yes
Wroooong in all ways
No argument needed
Poor use of talents
Liberalism means no morality.
The danger involved
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
It is wrong in every way
Why prostitution is wrong?
Corruption, exploitation and deception
It is wrong!!
Hookers spread disease
It is wrong.
Prostitution causes disorder in the individual and the cosmos
It's objectifying women
Prostitution is probably wrong but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Prostitution can affect anyone who isn't part of that physical intercourse of 15 minutes.
Paying to Rape
There's a reason people don't want it legalized!
Prostitution Increases Human Trafficking Inflows!
Corrupts the Equality of Sexes
We really to change our laws.
Your body is not your choice
It doesn't do good for anyone.
Porn is Prostitution
Prostitution is trashing your inner self.
Gender equality and poverty.
Have You Ever Met a Happy Prostitute
Of course it's morally wrong
Prostitution is morally wrong
Prostitution destroys how we see one another as human beings.
It is not god wants
What is wrong with u all??
Dangerous and greedy
Stop it ASAP
Treating women (or a child or anyone) as an object is wrong
Disgusting and immoral
Prostitution is wrong
If it is so good....
Morally yes but legally no.
Its morally wrong
Prostitution MORALLY unacceptable...
I did your mom
Street prostitutes kills chastity in men and making women a sex object.
It's completely wrong
I have as much problem with prositution as with ordering a pizza
Read the Bible
You Do Not Know Where Your Money Is Going To
It's incredibly wrong
Sex has consequences.
It's morally wrong
Get some self respect
Consenting adults are more natural that the repressive environment of the 'moral' crowd.
Because of family
I do not think so
Prostitution is not worse than...
Sex has always been a currency.
Not in itself.
Prostitution is morally not wrong.
It is not immoral.
Irrational Stigma Towards Prostitution
Prostitution should be legal
No, prostitution is not morally wrong.
No it's a choice
Prostitution is not morally wrong because the exchange of sex for money is wrong depending on the merits of its nature and circumstance.
Prostitution is just fine
Prostitution is not Immoral
Not morally wrong
If it's a free choice it's fine
Your body your choice
Prostitution is just a trade, there's nothing wrong morally of engaging in a trade
Prostitution is just a trade
No it is not
Why are some people so hung up on prostitution?
It is Moral but regulate it
Just another business transaction.
Prostitution is [negative adjective]"
Prostitution is absolutely normal, and it will ALWAYS exist
A subject of only how people perceives it....
Morality depends on each and every individual
Consent is key
We are all responsible
Everything is contract in some ways
Its just sex
I do t think prostitution is wrong
Not bad if no one is mistreated
It's a service, just as any other.
Prostitution isn't morally wrong
It all comes down to the stigma
I say no
Its their choice freedom is their right
It is morally wrong to control another person's freedom of agency.
It depends on the individual
It's Not a problem.
It's my body.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced and used correctly.
It's my hot body I do what I want
Its the best
Consentual Prostitution is not wrong
Life is a constant negotiation of power and money and people sell themselves everyday in many ways that don't involve sex. Sex is no different.
It's there choice?
Sex is the one being criminalized.
America's Repression of the Female Body
Its there choice
One's definition of morality is different from another
Consenting sex between Adults harms no one
Prostitution is a very honest transaction.
Morally not wrong
Prostitution is not by nature morally wrong. Regulation is the issue that needs to be discussed.
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
You're not selling yourself
What has legalization done for it?
To each their own
We go through life being told by our peers and elders to do what we want to do.
Demand and Option
More moral than most activities
What is marriage?
What goes on between CONSENTING adults, is nobody's business.
It's Your Body
It's disgusting sometimes, but not morally wrong.
Free Market Capitalism
It should be legal.
Content: Therefore, in a liberal country, it is 'immoral' to prohibit prostitution and any other form of restriction on sex. The reason why there are many moral rules that restrict or prohibit prostitution is that most, if not all, countries are not yet entirely liberal and capitalist. But it is clear that every society is directed toward more advanced capitalism and therefore, people would be more and more open to laws that allow them to satisfy sexual pleasure. But I think that the most fundamental morality that all human being should hold is one that makes human distinct from other animals. This does not mean that animals are innately bad. I think that humans already have many faculties and characters that all other animals do not have. One of them is the reasoning faculty, which cannot be activated when one is in extreme pain or extreme pleasure. Prostitution and any other form of unrestricted sex provide humans extreme pleasure, which makes us not undistinguishable with other animal. We should avoid being animals not because animals are naturally base, but humans are particularly special. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
The danger involved
Many people think prostitution just comes up with a phone call and the sex.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-morally-wrong?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852376319#19_1328628160
|
Title: Is prostitution morally wrong? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is prostitution morally wrong?
Prostitution is just downright gross
Prostitution makes a woman's life hell
Prostitution is disgusting
Prostitution is immoral
Sex should be between lovers
Morally yes
Wroooong in all ways
No argument needed
Poor use of talents
Liberalism means no morality.
The danger involved
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
It is wrong in every way
Why prostitution is wrong?
Corruption, exploitation and deception
It is wrong!!
Hookers spread disease
It is wrong.
Prostitution causes disorder in the individual and the cosmos
It's objectifying women
Prostitution is probably wrong but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Prostitution can affect anyone who isn't part of that physical intercourse of 15 minutes.
Paying to Rape
There's a reason people don't want it legalized!
Prostitution Increases Human Trafficking Inflows!
Corrupts the Equality of Sexes
We really to change our laws.
Your body is not your choice
It doesn't do good for anyone.
Porn is Prostitution
Prostitution is trashing your inner self.
Gender equality and poverty.
Have You Ever Met a Happy Prostitute
Of course it's morally wrong
Prostitution is morally wrong
Prostitution destroys how we see one another as human beings.
It is not god wants
What is wrong with u all??
Dangerous and greedy
Stop it ASAP
Treating women (or a child or anyone) as an object is wrong
Disgusting and immoral
Prostitution is wrong
If it is so good....
Morally yes but legally no.
Its morally wrong
Prostitution MORALLY unacceptable...
I did your mom
Street prostitutes kills chastity in men and making women a sex object.
It's completely wrong
I have as much problem with prositution as with ordering a pizza
Read the Bible
You Do Not Know Where Your Money Is Going To
It's incredibly wrong
Sex has consequences.
It's morally wrong
Get some self respect
Consenting adults are more natural that the repressive environment of the 'moral' crowd.
Because of family
I do not think so
Prostitution is not worse than...
Sex has always been a currency.
Not in itself.
Prostitution is morally not wrong.
It is not immoral.
Irrational Stigma Towards Prostitution
Prostitution should be legal
No, prostitution is not morally wrong.
No it's a choice
Prostitution is not morally wrong because the exchange of sex for money is wrong depending on the merits of its nature and circumstance.
Prostitution is just fine
Prostitution is not Immoral
Not morally wrong
If it's a free choice it's fine
Your body your choice
Prostitution is just a trade, there's nothing wrong morally of engaging in a trade
Prostitution is just a trade
No it is not
Why are some people so hung up on prostitution?
It is Moral but regulate it
Just another business transaction.
Prostitution is [negative adjective]"
Prostitution is absolutely normal, and it will ALWAYS exist
A subject of only how people perceives it....
Morality depends on each and every individual
Consent is key
We are all responsible
Everything is contract in some ways
Its just sex
I do t think prostitution is wrong
Not bad if no one is mistreated
It's a service, just as any other.
Prostitution isn't morally wrong
It all comes down to the stigma
I say no
Its their choice freedom is their right
It is morally wrong to control another person's freedom of agency.
It depends on the individual
It's Not a problem.
It's my body.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced and used correctly.
It's my hot body I do what I want
Its the best
Consentual Prostitution is not wrong
Life is a constant negotiation of power and money and people sell themselves everyday in many ways that don't involve sex. Sex is no different.
It's there choice?
Sex is the one being criminalized.
America's Repression of the Female Body
Its there choice
One's definition of morality is different from another
Consenting sex between Adults harms no one
Prostitution is a very honest transaction.
Morally not wrong
Prostitution is not by nature morally wrong. Regulation is the issue that needs to be discussed.
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
You're not selling yourself
What has legalization done for it?
To each their own
We go through life being told by our peers and elders to do what we want to do.
Demand and Option
More moral than most activities
What is marriage?
What goes on between CONSENTING adults, is nobody's business.
It's Your Body
It's disgusting sometimes, but not morally wrong.
Free Market Capitalism
It should be legal.
Content: They don't know what it is exactly like. Women are sold and made to have sex against their will. They are locked in cages and physically/sexually abused if they try to defend themselves. Men even exploit this vulnerability women have. Do you think the women being sold in brothels and on streetsides for sex want it? No, they have no choice. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
Its the same as stripping in front of a guy....... Woman need to respect their body.... Your body is not a wear and tear. And offering prostitution to man who is married may tempt him and lets say he agrees... Think about his wife. Prostitution should be illegal and a fine should be given to prostitutes found in the streets
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
It is wrong in every way
Prostitution/sex trafficking is wrong because it is the exploitation of a person's body, specifically women and children.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-morally-wrong?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852376319#20_1328634352
|
Title: Is prostitution morally wrong? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is prostitution morally wrong?
Prostitution is just downright gross
Prostitution makes a woman's life hell
Prostitution is disgusting
Prostitution is immoral
Sex should be between lovers
Morally yes
Wroooong in all ways
No argument needed
Poor use of talents
Liberalism means no morality.
The danger involved
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
It is wrong in every way
Why prostitution is wrong?
Corruption, exploitation and deception
It is wrong!!
Hookers spread disease
It is wrong.
Prostitution causes disorder in the individual and the cosmos
It's objectifying women
Prostitution is probably wrong but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Prostitution can affect anyone who isn't part of that physical intercourse of 15 minutes.
Paying to Rape
There's a reason people don't want it legalized!
Prostitution Increases Human Trafficking Inflows!
Corrupts the Equality of Sexes
We really to change our laws.
Your body is not your choice
It doesn't do good for anyone.
Porn is Prostitution
Prostitution is trashing your inner self.
Gender equality and poverty.
Have You Ever Met a Happy Prostitute
Of course it's morally wrong
Prostitution is morally wrong
Prostitution destroys how we see one another as human beings.
It is not god wants
What is wrong with u all??
Dangerous and greedy
Stop it ASAP
Treating women (or a child or anyone) as an object is wrong
Disgusting and immoral
Prostitution is wrong
If it is so good....
Morally yes but legally no.
Its morally wrong
Prostitution MORALLY unacceptable...
I did your mom
Street prostitutes kills chastity in men and making women a sex object.
It's completely wrong
I have as much problem with prositution as with ordering a pizza
Read the Bible
You Do Not Know Where Your Money Is Going To
It's incredibly wrong
Sex has consequences.
It's morally wrong
Get some self respect
Consenting adults are more natural that the repressive environment of the 'moral' crowd.
Because of family
I do not think so
Prostitution is not worse than...
Sex has always been a currency.
Not in itself.
Prostitution is morally not wrong.
It is not immoral.
Irrational Stigma Towards Prostitution
Prostitution should be legal
No, prostitution is not morally wrong.
No it's a choice
Prostitution is not morally wrong because the exchange of sex for money is wrong depending on the merits of its nature and circumstance.
Prostitution is just fine
Prostitution is not Immoral
Not morally wrong
If it's a free choice it's fine
Your body your choice
Prostitution is just a trade, there's nothing wrong morally of engaging in a trade
Prostitution is just a trade
No it is not
Why are some people so hung up on prostitution?
It is Moral but regulate it
Just another business transaction.
Prostitution is [negative adjective]"
Prostitution is absolutely normal, and it will ALWAYS exist
A subject of only how people perceives it....
Morality depends on each and every individual
Consent is key
We are all responsible
Everything is contract in some ways
Its just sex
I do t think prostitution is wrong
Not bad if no one is mistreated
It's a service, just as any other.
Prostitution isn't morally wrong
It all comes down to the stigma
I say no
Its their choice freedom is their right
It is morally wrong to control another person's freedom of agency.
It depends on the individual
It's Not a problem.
It's my body.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced and used correctly.
It's my hot body I do what I want
Its the best
Consentual Prostitution is not wrong
Life is a constant negotiation of power and money and people sell themselves everyday in many ways that don't involve sex. Sex is no different.
It's there choice?
Sex is the one being criminalized.
America's Repression of the Female Body
Its there choice
One's definition of morality is different from another
Consenting sex between Adults harms no one
Prostitution is a very honest transaction.
Morally not wrong
Prostitution is not by nature morally wrong. Regulation is the issue that needs to be discussed.
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
You're not selling yourself
What has legalization done for it?
To each their own
We go through life being told by our peers and elders to do what we want to do.
Demand and Option
More moral than most activities
What is marriage?
What goes on between CONSENTING adults, is nobody's business.
It's Your Body
It's disgusting sometimes, but not morally wrong.
Free Market Capitalism
It should be legal.
Content: No, they have no choice. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
Its the same as stripping in front of a guy....... Woman need to respect their body.... Your body is not a wear and tear. And offering prostitution to man who is married may tempt him and lets say he agrees... Think about his wife. Prostitution should be illegal and a fine should be given to prostitutes found in the streets
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
It is wrong in every way
Prostitution/sex trafficking is wrong because it is the exploitation of a person's body, specifically women and children. Some argue that "prostitution is no different than any other job on the market," however the two jobs are on opposite sides of the spectrum. Prostitution involves the selling of sex, the deepest most sacred part of an individual. Sex is God-ordained and not meant to share with those extramaritally. He gave it to us to share with our spouse to become one. It symbolizes commitment and love for your spouse.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-morally-wrong?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852376319#21_1328640637
|
Title: Is prostitution morally wrong? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is prostitution morally wrong?
Prostitution is just downright gross
Prostitution makes a woman's life hell
Prostitution is disgusting
Prostitution is immoral
Sex should be between lovers
Morally yes
Wroooong in all ways
No argument needed
Poor use of talents
Liberalism means no morality.
The danger involved
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
It is wrong in every way
Why prostitution is wrong?
Corruption, exploitation and deception
It is wrong!!
Hookers spread disease
It is wrong.
Prostitution causes disorder in the individual and the cosmos
It's objectifying women
Prostitution is probably wrong but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Prostitution can affect anyone who isn't part of that physical intercourse of 15 minutes.
Paying to Rape
There's a reason people don't want it legalized!
Prostitution Increases Human Trafficking Inflows!
Corrupts the Equality of Sexes
We really to change our laws.
Your body is not your choice
It doesn't do good for anyone.
Porn is Prostitution
Prostitution is trashing your inner self.
Gender equality and poverty.
Have You Ever Met a Happy Prostitute
Of course it's morally wrong
Prostitution is morally wrong
Prostitution destroys how we see one another as human beings.
It is not god wants
What is wrong with u all??
Dangerous and greedy
Stop it ASAP
Treating women (or a child or anyone) as an object is wrong
Disgusting and immoral
Prostitution is wrong
If it is so good....
Morally yes but legally no.
Its morally wrong
Prostitution MORALLY unacceptable...
I did your mom
Street prostitutes kills chastity in men and making women a sex object.
It's completely wrong
I have as much problem with prositution as with ordering a pizza
Read the Bible
You Do Not Know Where Your Money Is Going To
It's incredibly wrong
Sex has consequences.
It's morally wrong
Get some self respect
Consenting adults are more natural that the repressive environment of the 'moral' crowd.
Because of family
I do not think so
Prostitution is not worse than...
Sex has always been a currency.
Not in itself.
Prostitution is morally not wrong.
It is not immoral.
Irrational Stigma Towards Prostitution
Prostitution should be legal
No, prostitution is not morally wrong.
No it's a choice
Prostitution is not morally wrong because the exchange of sex for money is wrong depending on the merits of its nature and circumstance.
Prostitution is just fine
Prostitution is not Immoral
Not morally wrong
If it's a free choice it's fine
Your body your choice
Prostitution is just a trade, there's nothing wrong morally of engaging in a trade
Prostitution is just a trade
No it is not
Why are some people so hung up on prostitution?
It is Moral but regulate it
Just another business transaction.
Prostitution is [negative adjective]"
Prostitution is absolutely normal, and it will ALWAYS exist
A subject of only how people perceives it....
Morality depends on each and every individual
Consent is key
We are all responsible
Everything is contract in some ways
Its just sex
I do t think prostitution is wrong
Not bad if no one is mistreated
It's a service, just as any other.
Prostitution isn't morally wrong
It all comes down to the stigma
I say no
Its their choice freedom is their right
It is morally wrong to control another person's freedom of agency.
It depends on the individual
It's Not a problem.
It's my body.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced and used correctly.
It's my hot body I do what I want
Its the best
Consentual Prostitution is not wrong
Life is a constant negotiation of power and money and people sell themselves everyday in many ways that don't involve sex. Sex is no different.
It's there choice?
Sex is the one being criminalized.
America's Repression of the Female Body
Its there choice
One's definition of morality is different from another
Consenting sex between Adults harms no one
Prostitution is a very honest transaction.
Morally not wrong
Prostitution is not by nature morally wrong. Regulation is the issue that needs to be discussed.
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
You're not selling yourself
What has legalization done for it?
To each their own
We go through life being told by our peers and elders to do what we want to do.
Demand and Option
More moral than most activities
What is marriage?
What goes on between CONSENTING adults, is nobody's business.
It's Your Body
It's disgusting sometimes, but not morally wrong.
Free Market Capitalism
It should be legal.
Content: Some argue that "prostitution is no different than any other job on the market," however the two jobs are on opposite sides of the spectrum. Prostitution involves the selling of sex, the deepest most sacred part of an individual. Sex is God-ordained and not meant to share with those extramaritally. He gave it to us to share with our spouse to become one. It symbolizes commitment and love for your spouse. Sex shouldn't be abused by someone because they desire pleasure; sex should be meant for both pleasure and love. It's not one-sided. The reason why so many believe prostitution is okay is because they do not look at it from a biblical standpoint. Furthermore, prostitution stems from poverty, violence, and in many cases desperation.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-morally-wrong?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852376319#22_1328646588
|
Title: Is prostitution morally wrong? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is prostitution morally wrong?
Prostitution is just downright gross
Prostitution makes a woman's life hell
Prostitution is disgusting
Prostitution is immoral
Sex should be between lovers
Morally yes
Wroooong in all ways
No argument needed
Poor use of talents
Liberalism means no morality.
The danger involved
Yes!!!!!!!! Your body is not a wear and tear
It is wrong in every way
Why prostitution is wrong?
Corruption, exploitation and deception
It is wrong!!
Hookers spread disease
It is wrong.
Prostitution causes disorder in the individual and the cosmos
It's objectifying women
Prostitution is probably wrong but that doesn't mean it should be illegal.
Prostitution can affect anyone who isn't part of that physical intercourse of 15 minutes.
Paying to Rape
There's a reason people don't want it legalized!
Prostitution Increases Human Trafficking Inflows!
Corrupts the Equality of Sexes
We really to change our laws.
Your body is not your choice
It doesn't do good for anyone.
Porn is Prostitution
Prostitution is trashing your inner self.
Gender equality and poverty.
Have You Ever Met a Happy Prostitute
Of course it's morally wrong
Prostitution is morally wrong
Prostitution destroys how we see one another as human beings.
It is not god wants
What is wrong with u all??
Dangerous and greedy
Stop it ASAP
Treating women (or a child or anyone) as an object is wrong
Disgusting and immoral
Prostitution is wrong
If it is so good....
Morally yes but legally no.
Its morally wrong
Prostitution MORALLY unacceptable...
I did your mom
Street prostitutes kills chastity in men and making women a sex object.
It's completely wrong
I have as much problem with prositution as with ordering a pizza
Read the Bible
You Do Not Know Where Your Money Is Going To
It's incredibly wrong
Sex has consequences.
It's morally wrong
Get some self respect
Consenting adults are more natural that the repressive environment of the 'moral' crowd.
Because of family
I do not think so
Prostitution is not worse than...
Sex has always been a currency.
Not in itself.
Prostitution is morally not wrong.
It is not immoral.
Irrational Stigma Towards Prostitution
Prostitution should be legal
No, prostitution is not morally wrong.
No it's a choice
Prostitution is not morally wrong because the exchange of sex for money is wrong depending on the merits of its nature and circumstance.
Prostitution is just fine
Prostitution is not Immoral
Not morally wrong
If it's a free choice it's fine
Your body your choice
Prostitution is just a trade, there's nothing wrong morally of engaging in a trade
Prostitution is just a trade
No it is not
Why are some people so hung up on prostitution?
It is Moral but regulate it
Just another business transaction.
Prostitution is [negative adjective]"
Prostitution is absolutely normal, and it will ALWAYS exist
A subject of only how people perceives it....
Morality depends on each and every individual
Consent is key
We are all responsible
Everything is contract in some ways
Its just sex
I do t think prostitution is wrong
Not bad if no one is mistreated
It's a service, just as any other.
Prostitution isn't morally wrong
It all comes down to the stigma
I say no
Its their choice freedom is their right
It is morally wrong to control another person's freedom of agency.
It depends on the individual
It's Not a problem.
It's my body.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced correctly.
Prostitution is not ideal but it is not morally wrong if practiced and used correctly.
It's my hot body I do what I want
Its the best
Consentual Prostitution is not wrong
Life is a constant negotiation of power and money and people sell themselves everyday in many ways that don't involve sex. Sex is no different.
It's there choice?
Sex is the one being criminalized.
America's Repression of the Female Body
Its there choice
One's definition of morality is different from another
Consenting sex between Adults harms no one
Prostitution is a very honest transaction.
Morally not wrong
Prostitution is not by nature morally wrong. Regulation is the issue that needs to be discussed.
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
"Why is it illegal to charge for what can be freely dispensed?" As Catherine La Croix would say!
You're not selling yourself
What has legalization done for it?
To each their own
We go through life being told by our peers and elders to do what we want to do.
Demand and Option
More moral than most activities
What is marriage?
What goes on between CONSENTING adults, is nobody's business.
It's Your Body
It's disgusting sometimes, but not morally wrong.
Free Market Capitalism
It should be legal.
Content: Sex shouldn't be abused by someone because they desire pleasure; sex should be meant for both pleasure and love. It's not one-sided. The reason why so many believe prostitution is okay is because they do not look at it from a biblical standpoint. Furthermore, prostitution stems from poverty, violence, and in many cases desperation. Rarely do you hear about a woman who enjoys being a prostitute. Their hearts are broken, they are ashamed, and the countless men who use them for sex leave them feeling unworthy and dirty. They are often times abused and thought of as an item to be exploited for one's own good. So many people are blinded by the money aspect of prostitution that they lose sight of the moral and ethical aspects. Men, look into the heart of a woman instead of how her body can be
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-prostitution-morally-wrong?_escaped_fragment_=&_escaped_fragment_=
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#2_1328900591
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Least to Most
31% Say Yes
69% Say No
Created: New to Old
Created: Old to New
Likes: Most to Least
Likes: Least to Most
Replies: Most to Least
Replies: Least to Most
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
When a person is stereotyping someone or a group, they can discriminate someone for their race or ethnicity while verbally attacking the person. Stereotyping is when a person is attacking a person for their race or gender, or culture. Racism is when someone is attacking another because of their race. Usually, when someone is being racist, they would say stereotypical comments.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#3_1328902147
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Most to Least
Replies: Least to Most
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
When a person is stereotyping someone or a group, they can discriminate someone for their race or ethnicity while verbally attacking the person. Stereotyping is when a person is attacking a person for their race or gender, or culture. Racism is when someone is attacking another because of their race. Usually, when someone is being racist, they would say stereotypical comments. Stereotyping and racism is found within society, especially when their a majority and minority group in which the majority is "superior" to the minority group (giving them "right" to be able to attack the person verbally or physically--which is not true, it isn't right). Report Post
Like
Reply
0
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism. When you assume that a person engages in specific activities, eats certain foods, and speaks a particular fashion simply due to that person's skin color, that is racist behavior. Automatically labeling a person just because the individual comes from another country or possesses a certain skin color is completely racist and unfair. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Stereotyping is Racism
It's Racism because Stereotyping for example black people eat fried chicken every night and can't swim, it's a stereotype, but when you say that to a black person they get offended (just an example) it's basically racism in another form.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#4_1328904601
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Stereotyping and racism is found within society, especially when their a majority and minority group in which the majority is "superior" to the minority group (giving them "right" to be able to attack the person verbally or physically--which is not true, it isn't right). Report Post
Like
Reply
0
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism. When you assume that a person engages in specific activities, eats certain foods, and speaks a particular fashion simply due to that person's skin color, that is racist behavior. Automatically labeling a person just because the individual comes from another country or possesses a certain skin color is completely racist and unfair. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Stereotyping is Racism
It's Racism because Stereotyping for example black people eat fried chicken every night and can't swim, it's a stereotype, but when you say that to a black person they get offended (just an example) it's basically racism in another form. Stereotypes are basically the "most polite" way of racism which is wrong! Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I get so mad/and uncomfortable when non black ppl say to stereotypical things to me. Like why? Because of my ethnicity, skin tone.. Etc your gonna generalize me like that? Without knowing me or who i am, u assuma i like banana's or im a terroists because im muslim or whatever.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#5_1328907056
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Stereotypes are basically the "most polite" way of racism which is wrong! Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I get so mad/and uncomfortable when non black ppl say to stereotypical things to me. Like why? Because of my ethnicity, skin tone.. Etc your gonna generalize me like that? Without knowing me or who i am, u assuma i like banana's or im a terroists because im muslim or whatever. Stereotyping is racist
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
I mean think about it. When you hear someone making fun of another person's race it's usually with a stereotype. For instance all black people like fried chicken. All white girls like Starbucks. It's these types of stereotypes that makes it racist.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#6_1328908814
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Stereotyping is racist
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
I mean think about it. When you hear someone making fun of another person's race it's usually with a stereotype. For instance all black people like fried chicken. All white girls like Starbucks. It's these types of stereotypes that makes it racist. Although stereotyping is much broader than racism it is still a form of it. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Stereotyping towards a race is racism. Simple as that. You can't make a statement towards a race, then claim that it's simply a joke, or a stereotype. Even if it's a positive thing ("All Asians are smart.",
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#7_1328910451
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Although stereotyping is much broader than racism it is still a form of it. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Stereotyping towards a race is racism. Simple as that. You can't make a statement towards a race, then claim that it's simply a joke, or a stereotype. Even if it's a positive thing ("All Asians are smart.", or something that is kind of neutral ("All black people get tattoos."), it's still racist! You are labeling people just on their race, it's racist. If you are assuming things based off their race, like I said, it's racist. If you have to back up your "joke", by saying it was just a joke, or only a stereotype, then that means you have something to defend.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#8_1328912115
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: or something that is kind of neutral ("All black people get tattoos."), it's still racist! You are labeling people just on their race, it's racist. If you are assuming things based off their race, like I said, it's racist. If you have to back up your "joke", by saying it was just a joke, or only a stereotype, then that means you have something to defend. Jokes are supposed to be funny, not offending. If someone is getting offended, don't blame them for not being able to take a ''joke'', because obviously there was something wrong in what you said. Stereotypes don't have to be racist, (they can also be sexist, or simply just offensive,) but if you're stereotyping towards a race, it's racist. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes it is,
Racial stereotyping is a form of racism, espcially if the stereotype has any sort of negative connotation to it. Not only are you generalizing an entire culture, but you're making them inferior as a whole by saying these stereotypes.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#9_1328914083
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Jokes are supposed to be funny, not offending. If someone is getting offended, don't blame them for not being able to take a ''joke'', because obviously there was something wrong in what you said. Stereotypes don't have to be racist, (they can also be sexist, or simply just offensive,) but if you're stereotyping towards a race, it's racist. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes it is,
Racial stereotyping is a form of racism, espcially if the stereotype has any sort of negative connotation to it. Not only are you generalizing an entire culture, but you're making them inferior as a whole by saying these stereotypes. Negatively judging peoples based on the actions of one or a few others of the same culture is racism, don't do it. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
It is a form of racism. So as I was reading the "NO" side of the argument, it seems to me that all of them were citing that basically stereotyping is just a joke, or something that is stupid. But no, I disagree. If someone can get offended over any stereotypical comment, I think that would make it racist.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#10_1328916175
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Negatively judging peoples based on the actions of one or a few others of the same culture is racism, don't do it. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
It is a form of racism. So as I was reading the "NO" side of the argument, it seems to me that all of them were citing that basically stereotyping is just a joke, or something that is stupid. But no, I disagree. If someone can get offended over any stereotypical comment, I think that would make it racist. Racism,I believe, is basically in any way that makes the other person feel bad about who they are or attacking them just because of who they are. You shouldn't label anyone just because they are this color, religion, or anything. Not everyone, even if they are the same race, is the same. Stereotypical comments pretty much categorizes those certain people as a certain label. And I get a lot of stereotypical comments, and when I ask them to stop most of them said they were kidding.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#11_1328918103
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Racism,I believe, is basically in any way that makes the other person feel bad about who they are or attacking them just because of who they are. You shouldn't label anyone just because they are this color, religion, or anything. Not everyone, even if they are the same race, is the same. Stereotypical comments pretty much categorizes those certain people as a certain label. And I get a lot of stereotypical comments, and when I ask them to stop most of them said they were kidding. Even if they were kidding, words can hurt. People seriously need to think think about that before they throw a random stereotypical comment at anyone. Posted by: LCHS
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Its called Aversive Rascism
The jokes nowadays have gone from "orange you glad i didnt say bannana?" to "black people like chicken".
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#12_1328919923
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Even if they were kidding, words can hurt. People seriously need to think think about that before they throw a random stereotypical comment at anyone. Posted by: LCHS
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Its called Aversive Rascism
The jokes nowadays have gone from "orange you glad i didnt say bannana?" to "black people like chicken". That isnt okay. You cannot subject a whol race to one opinion. Even a good one. Like "Asians are smart." because NO ONE made you the spokes persons for that entire race.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#14_1328922899
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Because scientifically, there is no evidence that skin color or ethnicity is a factor in behavior or intelligence. And yes. Im 12 and live in the south, so you could say im fed up with this. These to guys on my bus cant keep their mouths shut about these things. And the bad part is that people subject their OWN race to aversive racsism. Making people think its okay. Like a black man saying black people play badketball when that isnt fair to every other black person on this earth because no one made YOU the spokes person. So how about we act color blind and ignore pigment and look more at personality
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes it is
When a person implies that another race isnt capable of something their race is then it is racist. Lets say the sterotype that black people are best at basketball. Are there not white people playing basketball?
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#15_1328924748
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Making people think its okay. Like a black man saying black people play badketball when that isnt fair to every other black person on this earth because no one made YOU the spokes person. So how about we act color blind and ignore pigment and look more at personality
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes it is
When a person implies that another race isnt capable of something their race is then it is racist. Lets say the sterotype that black people are best at basketball. Are there not white people playing basketball? There is no such thing as one race being capable of doing something the other isnt. By making that sterotype you have judged an entire race based on nothing but an opinion and Characterized them in one way. Notice how this doesnt belittle the race but has only put them in a certain catagory. However just the fact that they have been characterized based on their skin color means it is racist. Another example.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#16_1328926670
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: There is no such thing as one race being capable of doing something the other isnt. By making that sterotype you have judged an entire race based on nothing but an opinion and Characterized them in one way. Notice how this doesnt belittle the race but has only put them in a certain catagory. However just the fact that they have been characterized based on their skin color means it is racist. Another example. Lets say a middle eastern man is in an airport and a women walks up to him and tells hin i do not feel safe with you because you are most likely a terrorist. The lady has just put this man in the terrorist catagory without actually knowing where he came from or who he is. The individual could have been an american born man but with grandparents from middle easter areas. Inthat case he would have lived in the usa his whole life and in no way have been a terrorist. Or he could be from an area where there has never been reports of terrorism.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#17_1328928585
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: Lets say a middle eastern man is in an airport and a women walks up to him and tells hin i do not feel safe with you because you are most likely a terrorist. The lady has just put this man in the terrorist catagory without actually knowing where he came from or who he is. The individual could have been an american born man but with grandparents from middle easter areas. Inthat case he would have lived in the usa his whole life and in no way have been a terrorist. Or he could be from an area where there has never been reports of terrorism. But the lady has just characterized thisman to the terriost section just by a glance at his skin complextion. This where stero typing and goes hand in hand with racism
Posted by: the_one_and_only
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
I am doing a project on stereotyping and some stereotypes have truth behind them and others do not. Stereotyping is not a nice thing to do but some stereotypes are racist. Like black people like kool-aid at first you think what's wrong with that everyone likes kool-aid but, the stereotype comes from the belief that all black people are poor and kool-aid is all they can afford.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852584979#18_1328930779
|
Title: Is stereotyping racist? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is stereotyping racist?
Yes, stereotyping someone is a form of racism
Yes, stereotyping is a form of racism.
Stereotyping is Racism
How are you putting a whole race in one assumptiom
I mean think about it.
Stereotyping towards a race is racism.
Yes it is,
It is a form of racism.
Its called Aversive Rascism
Yes it is
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
As a social science graduate I say no
Some are sterotype , some are racist or both.
Is a Native American drawn in Native American Traditional Clothes Stereotypical?
There's a bit of a difference
Stereotyping is a tool for communication.
It's not. What more
Yes it is
No its not
Some stereotyping is racist, not all racism is stereotyping
Content: But the lady has just characterized thisman to the terriost section just by a glance at his skin complextion. This where stero typing and goes hand in hand with racism
Posted by: the_one_and_only
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Some Stereotypes Are Racist Some Are Not
I am doing a project on stereotyping and some stereotypes have truth behind them and others do not. Stereotyping is not a nice thing to do but some stereotypes are racist. Like black people like kool-aid at first you think what's wrong with that everyone likes kool-aid but, the stereotype comes from the belief that all black people are poor and kool-aid is all they can afford. Others like all white girls love starbucks isn't that bad because if you were to ask white girls if they like starbucks over 90% would say yes I do not say no stereotypes are not racist, I am writing under no because there is no in between. Posted by: Scribbles
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
gartyqam
ewtugegoi
2
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
As a social science graduate I say no
Most stereotypes are based on generalised observations of behaviour. These are useful for humans to make quick initial understandings about people which can then lead to further invitation are more in-depth discover of behaviours which can either dispel of confirm a stereotype to be true. Racism is the believe that one race is inferior than another simply for being a member of said race.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-stereotyping-racist
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_852616050#4_1328988448
|
Title: Is technology bad? | Debate.org
Headings:
Is technology bad?
It can be bad.
No it helps us advance
No it is not.
Technology is harmful and bad
Tech is bad
Technology is debatable
Ttwcv bilku lkdclj'd
Technology is bad.
He ejhhehe heh
Roblocks is innapropriate
Its gay bro
Omg this is kewl
Yes! Owo uwu
Its v bad dude
It is bad.
It is bad
Teckknalagy is bad
Yes Technology is bad
Too many reasons to list.
A qualified yes - when it is misused
I d o n t k n o w i d o n t k n o w
Can cause you to crash
Yes it is!
Its dirty and people put inappropriate stuff on social media
According to my opinion it is bad
Technology is ruining our lives.
Technology is becoming a bad thing
Because it can get hacked and it is a lot of mone
My son plays video games all day and I'm sick of it
Technology: no net benefit
Yes it is bad
It is bad because its not even a need.
Why it's bad for us
Yes it is bad
You people are stupid
Technology is bad
I learn from it
Tech is great
No It's Not
It makes things easier.
Completely the opposite
Technology has many useful advantages.
Technology is great.
Technology is not bad.
It's the humans. .
Stan nct bitches
Attention all epic gamergirls
Tech is good
Everything has a good and bad side
Technology is good
Technology is not a bad thing!!
Not when used properly.
Technology is taking over kid´s mind
Technology helps us learn new things!
Technology is bad based on the human using it
Not in itself.
It helps us
It is amazing
It can impact us in both a good way and a bad way.
Why do people believe technology is bad?
It is bad for you it is really bad
Technology Is Not Bad
Technology Is Not Bad!
It's Good Because
Where would we be today?
Nahh h hhhh
Mhhm... Its so tasty
Content: Everything is done by the internet now, Making us dependent upon electricity and technology rather than ourselves and our own brains. Impersonal communications, keeping you in touch with people or things that Do Not Matter. It may make things "easier" but we're they that Hard. Don't complain when robots take all your jobs and Everyone is on checks from the government, living places you were "Assigned" to live. Satire, alarmists..
How about Realists, Freethinkers. Not blinded by the lcd. That's is literally messing up our eyes. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No it helps us advance
Technology is in no way bad. It is a sign that our culture is evolving and finding better and bigger things. The problem is the corruption of people with technology.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-technology-bad
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853526845#5_1331452513
|
Title: Should evolution be taught in schools? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should evolution be taught in schools?
It has more support than creationism.
Evolution is scientific fact.
Why is this even a debate?
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution is a Scince
Logic over Blind Faith
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
The bible does not actually deny evolution
It is proven.
It is a common Theory of which people should know.
No!!
Evolution is a religion.
Evolution is simply a theory.
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools.
Evolution will make people doubt their religion.
Technically a Religion
No they shouldn't
Evolution is an outdated theory and a pathetic excuse for what really happened
Evolution destroys mankind.
No, evolution is a topic that should be taught at home, if parents so choose.
Content: If we're not going to teach evolution because it is "just a theory" then we might as well not teach that the earth orbits the sun, aka the heliocentric theory, that living things are made up of cells, aka the cell theory, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales, aka the theory of plate tectonics. In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. Posted by: Spencella
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
Kozinc
ThinkingCap
alikhan12345r
DevinBobosky
4
8
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Why is this even a debate? Religious beliefs should have no affect on content taught in classrooms. Schools are meant to teach rational and scientific thought, not faith-based beliefs. Everyone has a right to their own beliefs, of course, but education should not teach the unproven ones. Evolution is a proven foundation of science, and debating its existence is ridiculous. Report Post
Like
Reply
Jacob.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-evolution-be-taught-in-schools
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853526845#6_1331454878
|
Title: Should evolution be taught in schools? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should evolution be taught in schools?
It has more support than creationism.
Evolution is scientific fact.
Why is this even a debate?
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution is a Scince
Logic over Blind Faith
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
The bible does not actually deny evolution
It is proven.
It is a common Theory of which people should know.
No!!
Evolution is a religion.
Evolution is simply a theory.
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools.
Evolution will make people doubt their religion.
Technically a Religion
No they shouldn't
Evolution is an outdated theory and a pathetic excuse for what really happened
Evolution destroys mankind.
No, evolution is a topic that should be taught at home, if parents so choose.
Content: Religious beliefs should have no affect on content taught in classrooms. Schools are meant to teach rational and scientific thought, not faith-based beliefs. Everyone has a right to their own beliefs, of course, but education should not teach the unproven ones. Evolution is a proven foundation of science, and debating its existence is ridiculous. Report Post
Like
Reply
Jacob. LaLomia
1
6
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution can go along with religion. Teaching evolution can be taught as what happened AFTER life was on earth not HOW life came to be on earth. Even if God put life on earth, the life he put did change and evolve. I go to a religious school and we are still taught evolution because it is SCIENCE and it doesn't have to mean there is no God. THERE IS EVIDENCE SUPPORTING IT
Report Post
Like
Reply
rachid_O
TwitchyBait
2
6
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Evolution is a Scince
There is scientific backing to the theory of evolution.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-evolution-be-taught-in-schools
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853526845#7_1331456914
|
Title: Should evolution be taught in schools? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should evolution be taught in schools?
It has more support than creationism.
Evolution is scientific fact.
Why is this even a debate?
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution is a Scince
Logic over Blind Faith
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
The bible does not actually deny evolution
It is proven.
It is a common Theory of which people should know.
No!!
Evolution is a religion.
Evolution is simply a theory.
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools.
Evolution will make people doubt their religion.
Technically a Religion
No they shouldn't
Evolution is an outdated theory and a pathetic excuse for what really happened
Evolution destroys mankind.
No, evolution is a topic that should be taught at home, if parents so choose.
Content: LaLomia
1
6
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution can go along with religion. Teaching evolution can be taught as what happened AFTER life was on earth not HOW life came to be on earth. Even if God put life on earth, the life he put did change and evolve. I go to a religious school and we are still taught evolution because it is SCIENCE and it doesn't have to mean there is no God. THERE IS EVIDENCE SUPPORTING IT
Report Post
Like
Reply
rachid_O
TwitchyBait
2
6
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Evolution is a Scince
There is scientific backing to the theory of evolution. The fossils say yes. Evolution is a large part of science and is backed by many different sciences such as physics, biology, astronomy, etc. Religion is not science in the least. It is not fair for people to impose religious views on those otherwise uneducated. Depriving children of knowledge of evolution is making them scientifically illiterate.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-evolution-be-taught-in-schools
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853526845#8_1331458917
|
Title: Should evolution be taught in schools? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should evolution be taught in schools?
It has more support than creationism.
Evolution is scientific fact.
Why is this even a debate?
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution is a Scince
Logic over Blind Faith
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
The bible does not actually deny evolution
It is proven.
It is a common Theory of which people should know.
No!!
Evolution is a religion.
Evolution is simply a theory.
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools.
Evolution will make people doubt their religion.
Technically a Religion
No they shouldn't
Evolution is an outdated theory and a pathetic excuse for what really happened
Evolution destroys mankind.
No, evolution is a topic that should be taught at home, if parents so choose.
Content: The fossils say yes. Evolution is a large part of science and is backed by many different sciences such as physics, biology, astronomy, etc. Religion is not science in the least. It is not fair for people to impose religious views on those otherwise uneducated. Depriving children of knowledge of evolution is making them scientifically illiterate. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
6
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Logic over Blind Faith
Evolution is our current understanding of the nature of the living world. It does not pretend to explain creation, the origin of the universe, or the purpose of life. It is an extremely well supported theory based on scientific observation rather than ancient Coptic texts written down and revised over thousands of years. Really there are only three kinds of people in this arguement. 1.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-evolution-be-taught-in-schools
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853526845#10_1331462593
|
Title: Should evolution be taught in schools? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should evolution be taught in schools?
It has more support than creationism.
Evolution is scientific fact.
Why is this even a debate?
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution is a Scince
Logic over Blind Faith
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
The bible does not actually deny evolution
It is proven.
It is a common Theory of which people should know.
No!!
Evolution is a religion.
Evolution is simply a theory.
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools.
Evolution will make people doubt their religion.
Technically a Religion
No they shouldn't
Evolution is an outdated theory and a pathetic excuse for what really happened
Evolution destroys mankind.
No, evolution is a topic that should be taught at home, if parents so choose.
Content: Those who understand evolution
2. Those who do not understand evolution
3. Ignorant fundementalists
Posted by: NDNguitarguy
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
MUSEical
1
5
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
Its SCIENCE!! Woot woot! Creationists can continue to deny reality, but stay out of the school system, its bad enough already. Evolution is not just "random mutations" or "fish sprouting legs" its guided by NATURAL SELECTION. Asking "Should evolution be taught in schools" is like asking "Should the spherical Earth theory be taught in schools?" Thank you, goodbye. Report Post
Like
Reply
uzeyourbrain
1
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
The bible does not actually deny evolution
The main argument for banning evolution from being taught in schools is the idea that it is contrary to a number of people's religious beliefs.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-evolution-be-taught-in-schools
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853526845#11_1331464543
|
Title: Should evolution be taught in schools? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should evolution be taught in schools?
It has more support than creationism.
Evolution is scientific fact.
Why is this even a debate?
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution is a Scince
Logic over Blind Faith
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
The bible does not actually deny evolution
It is proven.
It is a common Theory of which people should know.
No!!
Evolution is a religion.
Evolution is simply a theory.
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools.
Evolution will make people doubt their religion.
Technically a Religion
No they shouldn't
Evolution is an outdated theory and a pathetic excuse for what really happened
Evolution destroys mankind.
No, evolution is a topic that should be taught at home, if parents so choose.
Content: Creationists can continue to deny reality, but stay out of the school system, its bad enough already. Evolution is not just "random mutations" or "fish sprouting legs" its guided by NATURAL SELECTION. Asking "Should evolution be taught in schools" is like asking "Should the spherical Earth theory be taught in schools?" Thank you, goodbye. Report Post
Like
Reply
uzeyourbrain
1
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
The bible does not actually deny evolution
The main argument for banning evolution from being taught in schools is the idea that it is contrary to a number of people's religious beliefs. However, the bible never states evolution did not occur. The bible is full of metaphors and stories and is therefore not to be taken literally and followed word by word; it is to be interpreted open-mindedly and must be used to extract conclusions from its stories which can be then applied improve our lives. When the bible says the world was created in seven days this statement is obviously not meant to be taken as a fact, but as a metaphor. There is scientific proof to back up the theory of evolution, and there is no denying that this is how human beings were developed, so it must be taught in schools as actual science, and doing so will not harm anyone's personal beliefs since none of these theories actually contradict one another.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-evolution-be-taught-in-schools
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853526845#15_1331473751
|
Title: Should evolution be taught in schools? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should evolution be taught in schools?
It has more support than creationism.
Evolution is scientific fact.
Why is this even a debate?
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution is a Scince
Logic over Blind Faith
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
The bible does not actually deny evolution
It is proven.
It is a common Theory of which people should know.
No!!
Evolution is a religion.
Evolution is simply a theory.
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools.
Evolution will make people doubt their religion.
Technically a Religion
No they shouldn't
Evolution is an outdated theory and a pathetic excuse for what really happened
Evolution destroys mankind.
No, evolution is a topic that should be taught at home, if parents so choose.
Content: Not because peoples' belief systems are squandered by it, but because the evidence isn't SOLID. I realize solid things aren't actually SOLID, (nothing is, and in science, it's especially subject to change,) but teaching, in school, of the Theory of Evolution as the Origin of Species is wrong. It should be presented as a THEORY, for so i'twas name'd. Posted by: ADH5380
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
0
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No!! Schools should not teach evolution. first off evolution DID NOT happen. Man was created by God. Not some half assed idea that we came from apes. Schools need to get back to Christian roots and teach how God made this earth and everything in it.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-evolution-be-taught-in-schools
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853526845#16_1331475487
|
Title: Should evolution be taught in schools? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should evolution be taught in schools?
It has more support than creationism.
Evolution is scientific fact.
Why is this even a debate?
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution is a Scince
Logic over Blind Faith
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
The bible does not actually deny evolution
It is proven.
It is a common Theory of which people should know.
No!!
Evolution is a religion.
Evolution is simply a theory.
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools.
Evolution will make people doubt their religion.
Technically a Religion
No they shouldn't
Evolution is an outdated theory and a pathetic excuse for what really happened
Evolution destroys mankind.
No, evolution is a topic that should be taught at home, if parents so choose.
Content: Schools should not teach evolution. first off evolution DID NOT happen. Man was created by God. Not some half assed idea that we came from apes. Schools need to get back to Christian roots and teach how God made this earth and everything in it. Its crap like evolution why our schools are in bad shape and violence happens. Report Post
Like
Reply
Amaturelogician
dimmesdale
alan13510
unknown28126
theyoungling
Banjo_Bear
Jesushaspower
obeidurrahman
8
25
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Evolution is a religion. If religion isn't allowed to be taught in schools then why is evolution being taught? Evolution requires much faith in order to believe that the big bang happened and that the Earth is billions of years old. It is not a fact, it is based on assumptions, and if I might add, it takes more faith in order to believe that nothing made something rather than God making something.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-evolution-be-taught-in-schools
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853526845#17_1331477427
|
Title: Should evolution be taught in schools? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should evolution be taught in schools?
It has more support than creationism.
Evolution is scientific fact.
Why is this even a debate?
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution is a Scince
Logic over Blind Faith
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
The bible does not actually deny evolution
It is proven.
It is a common Theory of which people should know.
No!!
Evolution is a religion.
Evolution is simply a theory.
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools.
Evolution will make people doubt their religion.
Technically a Religion
No they shouldn't
Evolution is an outdated theory and a pathetic excuse for what really happened
Evolution destroys mankind.
No, evolution is a topic that should be taught at home, if parents so choose.
Content: Its crap like evolution why our schools are in bad shape and violence happens. Report Post
Like
Reply
Amaturelogician
dimmesdale
alan13510
unknown28126
theyoungling
Banjo_Bear
Jesushaspower
obeidurrahman
8
25
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Evolution is a religion. If religion isn't allowed to be taught in schools then why is evolution being taught? Evolution requires much faith in order to believe that the big bang happened and that the Earth is billions of years old. It is not a fact, it is based on assumptions, and if I might add, it takes more faith in order to believe that nothing made something rather than God making something. Report Post
Like
Reply
alan13510
unknown28126
danzchen7
Banjo_Bear
Jesushaspower
Charliemouse
obeidurrahman
7
17
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Evolution is simply a theory. Evolution shouldn't be taught in schools because it is not proven! How can you say that a theory is factual science? I believe that if you HAVE to teach evolution in schools,you should teach all theories, NOT just evolution. Evolution is only one of the many theories of how the earth started and human life was created.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-evolution-be-taught-in-schools
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853526845#18_1331479627
|
Title: Should evolution be taught in schools? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should evolution be taught in schools?
It has more support than creationism.
Evolution is scientific fact.
Why is this even a debate?
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution is a Scince
Logic over Blind Faith
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
The bible does not actually deny evolution
It is proven.
It is a common Theory of which people should know.
No!!
Evolution is a religion.
Evolution is simply a theory.
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools.
Evolution will make people doubt their religion.
Technically a Religion
No they shouldn't
Evolution is an outdated theory and a pathetic excuse for what really happened
Evolution destroys mankind.
No, evolution is a topic that should be taught at home, if parents so choose.
Content: Report Post
Like
Reply
alan13510
unknown28126
danzchen7
Banjo_Bear
Jesushaspower
Charliemouse
obeidurrahman
7
17
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Evolution is simply a theory. Evolution shouldn't be taught in schools because it is not proven! How can you say that a theory is factual science? I believe that if you HAVE to teach evolution in schools,you should teach all theories, NOT just evolution. Evolution is only one of the many theories of how the earth started and human life was created. Creationism should be taught in schools as well. It is a very logical theory. Someone or something must have created such a complex world, and mind. I believe that children should be shown all theories and that they should be able to decide. The public schools should not be able to dictate what children put their faith in.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-evolution-be-taught-in-schools
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853526845#19_1331481500
|
Title: Should evolution be taught in schools? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should evolution be taught in schools?
It has more support than creationism.
Evolution is scientific fact.
Why is this even a debate?
YOU CAN STILL BE RELIGIOUS
Evolution is a Scince
Logic over Blind Faith
Its not a religion or political stance, or inappropriate...
The bible does not actually deny evolution
It is proven.
It is a common Theory of which people should know.
No!!
Evolution is a religion.
Evolution is simply a theory.
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools.
Evolution will make people doubt their religion.
Technically a Religion
No they shouldn't
Evolution is an outdated theory and a pathetic excuse for what really happened
Evolution destroys mankind.
No, evolution is a topic that should be taught at home, if parents so choose.
Content: Creationism should be taught in schools as well. It is a very logical theory. Someone or something must have created such a complex world, and mind. I believe that children should be shown all theories and that they should be able to decide. The public schools should not be able to dictate what children put their faith in. That is entirely up to yourself. Overall I do not believe in teaching evolution in schools. I believe that should be taught at home in an atmosphere where you decide your own beliefs. Report Post
Like
Reply
alan13510
unknown28126
danzchen7
imknowimnottheonlyone
Banjo_Bear
Jesushaspower
obeidurrahman
7
15
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Evolution Should Not be Taught in Schools. School is about learning facts.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-evolution-be-taught-in-schools
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853556235#2_1331551975
|
Title: Should free speech be restricted? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should free speech be restricted?
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should
Bbb bb bb
Never should it be restricted
Free speech should be allowed
Restriction is not logical
Free speech should not be restricted.
No, of course free speech should not be restricted!
No, free speech should not be restricted.
No
Not Any More Than Usual
Content: Least to Most
33% Say Yes
67% Say No
Created: New to Old
Created: Old to New
Likes: Most to Least
Likes: Least to Most
Replies: Most to Least
Replies: Least to Most
Yes it should be restricted! Yes our first amendment is freedom of speech, and yes that is what our founding fathers wanted, but since we have so much freedom there is so much danger in the U.S. for example if we had restrictions not as many bad people will get away with the crimes they do so easily. Because of our FREE SPEECH there are groups like the KU KLUX KLAN that create such danger to our society. Back then when there wasen't so much freedom those people would get arrested for what they have done.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-free-speech-be-restricted
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853556235#3_1331553292
|
Title: Should free speech be restricted? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should free speech be restricted?
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should
Bbb bb bb
Never should it be restricted
Free speech should be allowed
Restriction is not logical
Free speech should not be restricted.
No, of course free speech should not be restricted!
No, free speech should not be restricted.
No
Not Any More Than Usual
Content: Most to Least
Replies: Least to Most
Yes it should be restricted! Yes our first amendment is freedom of speech, and yes that is what our founding fathers wanted, but since we have so much freedom there is so much danger in the U.S. for example if we had restrictions not as many bad people will get away with the crimes they do so easily. Because of our FREE SPEECH there are groups like the KU KLUX KLAN that create such danger to our society. Back then when there wasen't so much freedom those people would get arrested for what they have done. If we had more restrictions there wouldn't be insidents like when they killed 9 black people in a church. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes it should be restricted! If there was no restriction people like Julian Assange would be able to get away with passing out highly confidential information which, if leaked, possesses a danger to the countries which it affects. This can range from details about war strategies to economic problems. If war strategies are exposed lives are likely to be needlessly lost;
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-free-speech-be-restricted
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853556235#4_1331555013
|
Title: Should free speech be restricted? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should free speech be restricted?
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should
Bbb bb bb
Never should it be restricted
Free speech should be allowed
Restriction is not logical
Free speech should not be restricted.
No, of course free speech should not be restricted!
No, free speech should not be restricted.
No
Not Any More Than Usual
Content: If we had more restrictions there wouldn't be insidents like when they killed 9 black people in a church. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
1
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes it should be restricted! If there was no restriction people like Julian Assange would be able to get away with passing out highly confidential information which, if leaked, possesses a danger to the countries which it affects. This can range from details about war strategies to economic problems. If war strategies are exposed lives are likely to be needlessly lost; if economic secrets are exposed this could cause a major setback in economic stability or recovery. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes it should
Idrk I'm just doing a project for a debate in English class but so far after what heard it isn't good. And i need 29 more words so im just gonna say that it hurts people and theres something about slander. Also most peopleuse it in the wrong way. Ya
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Bbb bb bb
Bbb bbb bb b f f f f f f f f f f ff f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Never should it be restricted
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-free-speech-be-restricted
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853556235#5_1331556996
|
Title: Should free speech be restricted? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should free speech be restricted?
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should
Bbb bb bb
Never should it be restricted
Free speech should be allowed
Restriction is not logical
Free speech should not be restricted.
No, of course free speech should not be restricted!
No, free speech should not be restricted.
No
Not Any More Than Usual
Content: if economic secrets are exposed this could cause a major setback in economic stability or recovery. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Yes it should
Idrk I'm just doing a project for a debate in English class but so far after what heard it isn't good. And i need 29 more words so im just gonna say that it hurts people and theres something about slander. Also most peopleuse it in the wrong way. Ya
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Bbb bb bb
Bbb bbb bb b f f f f f f f f f f ff f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Never should it be restricted
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. FREEDOM OF SPEECH SHOULDN'T BE RESTRICTED
Posted by: MEMEMASTER2005
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
MEMEMASTER2005
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Free speech should be allowed
With so many restrictions these days, there are never really anything we can do but with this one little oppertunity we have been having for years gives us a chance to let out our voices and say what we want. When a free speech is made, it usually gives many insparaitions to people.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-free-speech-be-restricted
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853556235#6_1331559075
|
Title: Should free speech be restricted? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should free speech be restricted?
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should
Bbb bb bb
Never should it be restricted
Free speech should be allowed
Restriction is not logical
Free speech should not be restricted.
No, of course free speech should not be restricted!
No, free speech should not be restricted.
No
Not Any More Than Usual
Content: or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. FREEDOM OF SPEECH SHOULDN'T BE RESTRICTED
Posted by: MEMEMASTER2005
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
MEMEMASTER2005
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Free speech should be allowed
With so many restrictions these days, there are never really anything we can do but with this one little oppertunity we have been having for years gives us a chance to let out our voices and say what we want. When a free speech is made, it usually gives many insparaitions to people. With free speech lets others around the world hear you and take it in their hearts. Report Post
Like
Reply
MEMEMASTER2005
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Restriction is not logical
Freedom of speech is an essential human right , i think. We can look an issue from different perspectives and have an idea about it or we can see what is true or not when speech is freedom. If there are some restrictions about speech , only people controlling power lead society and manipulate ideas according to their interests. It is also true that freedom has limits and our freedom ends where the others start but it is not clear evidence to protect society from harmful effects of speech because there are also books , the net etc other media sources and they can be accessible , too.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-free-speech-be-restricted
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853556235#7_1331561123
|
Title: Should free speech be restricted? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should free speech be restricted?
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should
Bbb bb bb
Never should it be restricted
Free speech should be allowed
Restriction is not logical
Free speech should not be restricted.
No, of course free speech should not be restricted!
No, free speech should not be restricted.
No
Not Any More Than Usual
Content: With free speech lets others around the world hear you and take it in their hearts. Report Post
Like
Reply
MEMEMASTER2005
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Restriction is not logical
Freedom of speech is an essential human right , i think. We can look an issue from different perspectives and have an idea about it or we can see what is true or not when speech is freedom. If there are some restrictions about speech , only people controlling power lead society and manipulate ideas according to their interests. It is also true that freedom has limits and our freedom ends where the others start but it is not clear evidence to protect society from harmful effects of speech because there are also books , the net etc other media sources and they can be accessible , too. No way to escape misinformation , for this reason it is not logical to restrict people's speech .On the contrary, it is a really good way to choose true information when people show their reactions , feelings or informations about topics ,addition to this society also can have a true attitude toward the what is going on. Posted by: denizgamze
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
MEMEMASTER2005
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Free speech should not be restricted. Freedom of speech is protect by the first amendment of the constitution, and it should not be restricted. This is an important political right and civil liberty.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-free-speech-be-restricted
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853556235#8_1331563169
|
Title: Should free speech be restricted? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should free speech be restricted?
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should
Bbb bb bb
Never should it be restricted
Free speech should be allowed
Restriction is not logical
Free speech should not be restricted.
No, of course free speech should not be restricted!
No, free speech should not be restricted.
No
Not Any More Than Usual
Content: No way to escape misinformation , for this reason it is not logical to restrict people's speech .On the contrary, it is a really good way to choose true information when people show their reactions , feelings or informations about topics ,addition to this society also can have a true attitude toward the what is going on. Posted by: denizgamze
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
MEMEMASTER2005
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Free speech should not be restricted. Freedom of speech is protect by the first amendment of the constitution, and it should not be restricted. This is an important political right and civil liberty. If the government tries to limit our right to freedom of speech, people will protest and this change will be remain in law. Report Post
Like
Reply
MEMEMASTER2005
denizgamze
2
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No, of course free speech should not be restricted! We live in the United States, and one major perk that we have here is our freedom! This includes freedom of speech. If we start restricting that, what else will this Country restrict?
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-free-speech-be-restricted
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853556235#9_1331564885
|
Title: Should free speech be restricted? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should free speech be restricted?
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should
Bbb bb bb
Never should it be restricted
Free speech should be allowed
Restriction is not logical
Free speech should not be restricted.
No, of course free speech should not be restricted!
No, free speech should not be restricted.
No
Not Any More Than Usual
Content: If the government tries to limit our right to freedom of speech, people will protest and this change will be remain in law. Report Post
Like
Reply
MEMEMASTER2005
denizgamze
2
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No, of course free speech should not be restricted! We live in the United States, and one major perk that we have here is our freedom! This includes freedom of speech. If we start restricting that, what else will this Country restrict? What will make us different from third world countries? We need to stick to what our founding fathers wanted for this Country! Report Post
Like
Reply
denizgamze
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No, free speech should not be restricted. Almost every argument that supports restrictions on free speech includes some kind of subjective element, such as a level of offensiveness or undermining some type of "good" thought. But evaluating this subjective element always falls in the hands of the majority or power-holders, who have an interest in repressing disruptive thought.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-free-speech-be-restricted
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853556235#10_1331566549
|
Title: Should free speech be restricted? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should free speech be restricted?
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should
Bbb bb bb
Never should it be restricted
Free speech should be allowed
Restriction is not logical
Free speech should not be restricted.
No, of course free speech should not be restricted!
No, free speech should not be restricted.
No
Not Any More Than Usual
Content: What will make us different from third world countries? We need to stick to what our founding fathers wanted for this Country! Report Post
Like
Reply
denizgamze
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No, free speech should not be restricted. Almost every argument that supports restrictions on free speech includes some kind of subjective element, such as a level of offensiveness or undermining some type of "good" thought. But evaluating this subjective element always falls in the hands of the majority or power-holders, who have an interest in repressing disruptive thought. Report Post
Like
Reply
denizgamze
Natec
2
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No
Free speech is a right of the constitution. We need to make sure we do not step on those rights. We should always be able to say how we feel about some thing especially if it is going to affect us or our family. That right has been around for a long time and should remain for a long time. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Not Any More Than Usual
Free speech should not be restricted any more than usual.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-free-speech-be-restricted
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853556235#11_1331568283
|
Title: Should free speech be restricted? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should free speech be restricted?
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should be restricted!
Yes it should
Bbb bb bb
Never should it be restricted
Free speech should be allowed
Restriction is not logical
Free speech should not be restricted.
No, of course free speech should not be restricted!
No, free speech should not be restricted.
No
Not Any More Than Usual
Content: Report Post
Like
Reply
denizgamze
Natec
2
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
No
Free speech is a right of the constitution. We need to make sure we do not step on those rights. We should always be able to say how we feel about some thing especially if it is going to affect us or our family. That right has been around for a long time and should remain for a long time. Report Post
Like
Reply
0
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Not Any More Than Usual
Free speech should not be restricted any more than usual. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded place without a fire actually happening. You can't make threats against someone without consequences. However, as long as no one gets hurt or no one is harmed, free speech should be allowed to endure. Posted by: williambrowning
Report Post
Like
Reply Challenge
denizgamze
1
0
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-free-speech-be-restricted
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853762461#13_1332155304
|
Title: Should illegal immigrants be allowed to stay in America? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should illegal immigrants be allowed to stay in America?
We are the country of freedom
To White People And Donald Trump
Let them stay!
Why Marijuana? Legalize my parents.
They need to stay.
They are good
Let them Stay!
Give them their rights
Help them live in peace
Let them stay!!!
Stay Out.
Illegal immigrants are illegal
Of course not!
Take them outta here!
Why is this even a debate?
It's all about changing the electoral map!
No illegal immigration
Get in line
Why not be a citizen?
Faster immigration -- but not one-day.
Content: If it was that easy to become a U.S citizen then they would've already done it, but it's hard and most a y'all don't understand. There is jobs that not everyone wants but immigrants take right away. Welfare immigrants don't receive it and that's a law, only U.S citizens can get them. And if I am correct the only people I see standing beside a highway is American people while immigrants work their butt off. And one last thing Mexicans are not the only immigrants in the U.S. Stop being racist and give a chance to the people that actually want to be here. God Bless you all. Report Post
Like
Reply
anapaola
samuel120
2
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
They are good
They do jobs that normal Americans don't like doing and they work harder then most Americans that make a better society, leading to better economical growth. We also want them to live a happy life, not a crappy life. Even though they are called ILLEGAL migrants why do we think they will do illegal things
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Let them Stay! 1.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-illegal-immigrants-be-allowed-to-stay-in-america
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853778601#20_1332212020
|
Title: Should immigrants be allowed in the United States? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should immigrants be allowed in the United States?
Has Humanity Been Lost?
They should come..
Immigrants should be allowed because this is a country of immigrants.
Yes, America was built on immigrants.
Declaration of Independence
Yes they should
Immigrants should be welcome
Statue of Liberty
Yes! Let them come!
Immigrants would be allowed in the U.S
Immigrants Should Be Allowed
Close our boarders
Lack of resources
How about this question.... WHAT GOOD WILL THEY DO FOR OUR COUNTRY? Country....?
They do more harm then good.
It's not fair
4 Solid Reasons Why It's a Terrible Idea
Immigrants should be allowed.
Balances one another
Immigrants should be deported
Content: Us, as Americans, have to pay bills and taxes. Which get taken out of our paychecks from when we get paid. Report Post
Like
Reply
KerryAnn1
1
5
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
4 Solid Reasons Why It's a Terrible Idea
1. Encourages Illegals to Come- With the admission of illegal immigrants, Pandora's Box opens. It's a black hole that sucks in illegals left and right into the United States. We left the door open a crack during Regan's administration, and illegal immigration hasn't led up. The more people we let in the more people are on their way, and once we close the door for good, "it's racist." 2. Illegal Immigrants Take Jobs Away From U.S. Citizens- I don't want to hear that they have jobs that "American's won't do." Americans won't do those jobs because they are grossly underpaid.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-immigrants-be-allowed-in-the-united-states
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_853778601#21_1332213803
|
Title: Should immigrants be allowed in the United States? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should immigrants be allowed in the United States?
Has Humanity Been Lost?
They should come..
Immigrants should be allowed because this is a country of immigrants.
Yes, America was built on immigrants.
Declaration of Independence
Yes they should
Immigrants should be welcome
Statue of Liberty
Yes! Let them come!
Immigrants would be allowed in the U.S
Immigrants Should Be Allowed
Close our boarders
Lack of resources
How about this question.... WHAT GOOD WILL THEY DO FOR OUR COUNTRY? Country....?
They do more harm then good.
It's not fair
4 Solid Reasons Why It's a Terrible Idea
Immigrants should be allowed.
Balances one another
Immigrants should be deported
Content: We left the door open a crack during Regan's administration, and illegal immigration hasn't led up. The more people we let in the more people are on their way, and once we close the door for good, "it's racist." 2. Illegal Immigrants Take Jobs Away From U.S. Citizens- I don't want to hear that they have jobs that "American's won't do." Americans won't do those jobs because they are grossly underpaid. Employers are now paying for the workers, not for the work itself. These illegals come from nothing, so they work for nothing, and that has proven that is doesn't bolster the economy. 3. We Are Importing Poverty- Just keep the poverty rate sky-high... Obama is accomplishing absolutely nothing by attempting to pass, all this means is that illegals are coming here, and ruining our economy. 4.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-immigrants-be-allowed-in-the-united-states
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_854203820#7_1333402478
|
Title: Should people be allowed to own guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should people be allowed to own guns?
Yes, we should be able to own guns.
Yes, we should.
Yes, to protect from violence.
Yes we should
guns are useful
Guns save lives
Guns are good.
Gun Rights Needed
Because We can.
Guns are good
Are people mad ?
People are Irresponsible and Don't know How to Properly handle Situations
Guns? No
I think that of course people shouldn't have own guns.
At least 395 people have been killed in school shootings by guns.
People Should Not Be Allowed To Own Guns
Guns are stupid
No, People Shouldn't be Allowed to Have Guns.
No we shouldn't
Guns for protection?
Content: In my opinion I would rather have guns by my side over not, in case a robber breaks into my house, I am prepared for action. Report Post
Like
Reply
lydiaaf
1
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
guns are useful
If I put a 22 pistol and bullets on a table, more than likely it won't load itself and kill someone... I don't see why people think that guns are such a bad idea. Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. We all heard that before, but do the idiots in the government see that? All you're going to do is make a lot of people mad when you take guns away. You think you're gonna take em, but I do not think so.. You'll have even more deaths over guns then. Report Post
Like
Reply
Andrew_H
eatit
lydiaaf
98154
John-Crippen
33DGUNS1
BrutalChameleon
DrakonOverlord
1600034
gunownersforgodandcountry
10
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Guns save lives
Many people believe that guns are the things that kill people. But it is actually the people that decide to pull the trigger that are the killers. Even if we completely banned guns in the US, People would still find a way to kill others. They can as easily pick up a knife and go kill somebody else.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-people-be-allowed-to-own-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_854203820#8_1333404540
|
Title: Should people be allowed to own guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should people be allowed to own guns?
Yes, we should be able to own guns.
Yes, we should.
Yes, to protect from violence.
Yes we should
guns are useful
Guns save lives
Guns are good.
Gun Rights Needed
Because We can.
Guns are good
Are people mad ?
People are Irresponsible and Don't know How to Properly handle Situations
Guns? No
I think that of course people shouldn't have own guns.
At least 395 people have been killed in school shootings by guns.
People Should Not Be Allowed To Own Guns
Guns are stupid
No, People Shouldn't be Allowed to Have Guns.
No we shouldn't
Guns for protection?
Content: You think you're gonna take em, but I do not think so.. You'll have even more deaths over guns then. Report Post
Like
Reply
Andrew_H
eatit
lydiaaf
98154
John-Crippen
33DGUNS1
BrutalChameleon
DrakonOverlord
1600034
gunownersforgodandcountry
10
3
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Guns save lives
Many people believe that guns are the things that kill people. But it is actually the people that decide to pull the trigger that are the killers. Even if we completely banned guns in the US, People would still find a way to kill others. They can as easily pick up a knife and go kill somebody else. Then if we ban knives somebody can take a car and drive it through a road of human being. People will do anything to get what they want, So I don't think that banning guns is the right way to go
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Guns are good. Why don't we just have all the people who don't want guns have a war against all the people who do want guns and we'll see who wins? For real, Though, Banning guns would do SO much to the economy. What about ones yet to be sold?
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-people-be-allowed-to-own-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_854203820#9_1333406526
|
Title: Should people be allowed to own guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should people be allowed to own guns?
Yes, we should be able to own guns.
Yes, we should.
Yes, to protect from violence.
Yes we should
guns are useful
Guns save lives
Guns are good.
Gun Rights Needed
Because We can.
Guns are good
Are people mad ?
People are Irresponsible and Don't know How to Properly handle Situations
Guns? No
I think that of course people shouldn't have own guns.
At least 395 people have been killed in school shootings by guns.
People Should Not Be Allowed To Own Guns
Guns are stupid
No, People Shouldn't be Allowed to Have Guns.
No we shouldn't
Guns for protection?
Content: Then if we ban knives somebody can take a car and drive it through a road of human being. People will do anything to get what they want, So I don't think that banning guns is the right way to go
Report Post
Like
Reply
0
2
(Maximum 900 words)
Submit
Guns are good. Why don't we just have all the people who don't want guns have a war against all the people who do want guns and we'll see who wins? For real, Though, Banning guns would do SO much to the economy. What about ones yet to be sold? Would compensation be provided to those manufacturers? Where would that money come from? Our taxes, Of course! And if there's no compensation, That's not fair! And what about all the guns already out there?
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-people-be-allowed-to-own-guns
|
msmarco_v2.1_doc_05_854203820#11_1333409468
|
Title: Should people be allowed to own guns? | Debate.org
Headings:
Should people be allowed to own guns?
Yes, we should be able to own guns.
Yes, we should.
Yes, to protect from violence.
Yes we should
guns are useful
Guns save lives
Guns are good.
Gun Rights Needed
Because We can.
Guns are good
Are people mad ?
People are Irresponsible and Don't know How to Properly handle Situations
Guns? No
I think that of course people shouldn't have own guns.
At least 395 people have been killed in school shootings by guns.
People Should Not Be Allowed To Own Guns
Guns are stupid
No, People Shouldn't be Allowed to Have Guns.
No we shouldn't
Guns for protection?
Content: There's no way we could collect them all. If anything, That just guarantees that the guns go to the criminals because nobody else is going to accept a gun now. Furthermore, There's the whole shooting aspect. Rifle ranges, Hunting, Etc. How do we make up for all that? Furthermore, We get to media productions. If there were no guns, Realistic fiction movies and TV shows wouldn't be able to have guns in them anymore with the same effect. Anyone who owned one would be a criminal. And I haven't even touched the "I need one to defend myself" argument, Though that one is very valid but I feel like a lot of others have already backed that up. But really, We should just have a few states ban guns and people who don't want guns move there, Then just add high security on the borders of those states.
|
http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-people-be-allowed-to-own-guns
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.